Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the CMA's 2001 Physician Resource Questionnaire (PRQ), Internet use among physicians continues to rise, with 84% of physicians reporting that they use the Internet, compared with 76% in 2000. Younger physicians are most likely to be online, with 92% of those under 35 and 89% of those aged 35–44 reporting that they use the Internet, compared with 80% of those in the 45–54 age group and 64% of those 65 years and older. While the rate of Internet use is up among all age groups in the past year, the largest increase was in the 65-and-older cohort, which stood at only 44% in 2000. Forty-three percent of non-Internet users indicated that they plan to start using the medium in the next 12 months. Following a pattern evident in previous years, GP/FPs are somewhat less likely to use the Internet (78%) than medical (89%) and surgical specialists (88%). For the first time in 2001, the PRQ asked about the locations at which physicians engage in Internet activities. Thirty-eight percent of respondents indicated that they use the Internet only at home, 6% use it only at a professional location and 55% use it at home as well as at a professional location. Seventy-eight percent of respondents said they spend most time online at home, while only 19% indicated that most of their Internet use takes place at a professional location. The PRQ is Canada's largest annual survey of the professional activities of physicians. The 2001 survey was mailed to a random sample of 7756 doctors, and the response rate was 42%. Results at the national level are considered accurate to ± 1.8%, 19 times out of 20. Tables from the 2001 PRQ are available at www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-165/issue-5/prq/index.asp.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".