The economic impacts of Oklahoma's Family Medicine residency programs.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The enactment of Medicare and Medicaid created a new demand for medical services in Oklahoma, particularly in rural areas. The state of Oklahoma responded by creating The Oklahoma Physician Manpower Training Commission in 1975. The overall purpose of the Commission was to increase the number of primary care physicians and influence distribution into non-metro areas. This analysis concerns the public policy value of this ongoing program. The PMTC has provided resident stipend funding to each of Oklahoma's publicly funded Family Medicine residency programs. Since 1975, the PMTC has provided over 139 million dollars in resident stipend funding and support; and there have been 749 program graduates with 431 practicing in Oklahoma. This model calculates that the Oklahoma-based physicians have created a cumulative 3.7 billion dollars of economic impact on the state; and conservatively estimates that only 10% of the practice decisions/locations were influenced by the PMTC. This creates an estimated return of 370 million dollars on an "investment" of 139 million dollars. Additionally the model demonstrates that the current cohort of physicians is annually responsible for 15,530 jobs and an associated payroll of 428 million dollars.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".