A profile of Canada's radiologists: results from the 2004 National Physician Survey.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the demographics and practices of radiologists nationwide as indicated by a selected subset of results from the 2004 National Physician Survey. METHODS: The original email survey data were collected by the College of Family Physicians of Canada, the Canadian Medical Association, and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. Data collected included information regarding physician demographics and research, teaching, and practice characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 646 radiologists responded (of an estimated 1910), giving a response rate of 33.8%. The greatest number of respondents worked either in a community hospital (59.4%) or in a private practice (50%). Most preferred working within a group (78.8%). Most respondents spent up to 120 hours monthly on call (69.1%). On average, respondents spent nearly 41 weeks yearly on clinical care, administration, teaching, continuing medical education, and research. Most respondents (75.9%) obtained their income through fee-for-service payment plans. CONCLUSIONS: The fundamental characteristics of Canadian radiologists currently in practice are described, and their implications for the future of radiology in Canada are discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".