MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2461277279

Utilization Review of Specialized Services and Underlying Social Factors among Urban Families in Fars Province, Iran.

2016· article· en· W2461277279 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ali Tavakoli, Mehrzad Lotfi, Zahra Kavosi, Masoomeh Zarifi, Ali Ayoubian

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Service (business)MedicineMedical servicesFamily medicineSample (material)Outpatient clinicEnvironmental healthHealth servicesSocioeconomicsGeographyHealth careBusinessPopulationEconomic growthMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The present study is a utilization review of outpatient services offered by specialists and underlying social factors among urban families in Fars Province, Iran. METHODS: The present study conducted among 1900 residents in urban areas of Fars Province in January 2013. Sampling was carried out through a three-step method, which was designed based on utilization of health services survey. Data were analyzed using statistical tests. RESULTS: About a quarter of the sample group expressed the need for outpatient services of specialists, of whom about 83% received medical attention of a specialist. Among the main reasons for not referring to specialists were financial issues as the top reason followed by refusal to visit the physician, long distances and high costs of the services. CONCLUSION: About 17% of the participants who needed outpatient services of specialists failed to receive the service. This indicates the necessity of measurements to improve the access to outpatient services of specialists among different social groups.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.292
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicOphthalmology and Visual Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207