Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Institute for Health Information reports that the average age of Canadian physicians rose over the last 5 years, from 46.3 years in 1995 to 47.2 years in 1999. The proportion of physicians aged 50 to 59 also increased, from 19.6% in 1995 to 22.8% in 1999. The number of physicians younger than 40 fell during the same period, from 33% of the total to 28.1%. Although the overall number of physicians relative to the population has remained stable over the last 5 years at about 185 physicians per 100 000 population, the proportion of family physicians relative to the supply of specialists is decreasing. The number of family physicians per 100 000 population dropped by 3.1% between 1995 and 1999, while the number of specialist physicians per 100 000 population rose by 3.4%. The number of physicians emigrating from Canada continues to decline from the peak levels reached in the mid-1990s, with 585 physicians moving abroad during 1999 and 343 returning. The proportion of specialists migrating (69%) far exceeded that of family physicians (31%), although this has not always been the case. From the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s, the proportion of emigrating family physicians was consistently higher than that of specialists. The average age of physicians leaving the country was 40, while the average age of those returning to active practice in Canada was 41. —
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.009 |
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".