MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400965319 · doi:10.1177/1715163515578123

Interprofessional student-run primary health care clinics

2015· article· en· W2400965319 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Robert Pammett, Eric Landry, Anita Elaine Weidmann, Derek Jorgenson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du Canada · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimary careMedicinePrimary health careFamily medicineNursingEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Student-run primary health care clinics (SRPHCCs) are prevalent in the United States and have reported benefits not only by providing medical care for underserved patients but also by acting as a valuable learning experience for medical students. 1There are currently 7 SRPHCCs in Canada. 2 The Community Health Initiative by University Students (CHIUS) in Vancouver, British Columbia, was the first to open its doors in April 2000.Subsequently, 6 additional SRPHCCs have opened in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario. 2 These Canadian student-run primary health care clinics offer medical services that are similar to those available in typical family doctors' offices; however, most patients of the SRPHCCs seek care on a walk-in basis, in contrast to appointment-based encounters.What makes these SRPHCCs unique (in addition to the fact that they are operated by students) is that they use a collaborative, interprofessional approach and that patients can access a wide variety of educational and social services at the clinics, not exclusively medical care.The purpose of this article is to describe the function of interprofessional SRPHCCs in Canada and to discuss potential benefits of the model for educating undergraduate pharmacy students.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.386 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Pharmacists Journal / Revue des Pharmaciens du CanadaSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207