MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2592201933 · doi:10.5937/opmed1504075r

Family medicine in Republic of Srpska

2015· article· en· W2592201933 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maja Račić

Bibliographic record

VenueOpsta medicina · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipCurriculumMedical educationMedicineAgency (philosophy)Health careNursingFamily medicinePolitical scienceBusinessSociologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Family Medicine Development Project in Republic of Srpska was an initiative funded by the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA). The project introduced family medicine into undergraduate curricula, established three-years long program of residency in family medicine in 1999, created departments of family medicine in both medical schools, helped with the process of establishing a professional association of family physicians, worked with Ministries of health and social welfare to establish supportive policies for these activities, and regularly provided continuing medical education programs for family practitioners during the 13 years of the project. Today, three family medicine teaching centers exist in RS (Primary health care centers Banja Luka, Foča and Bijeljina) where more than 600 physicians were educated either through residency or additional training program in family medicine. Almost 1000 primary care nurses completed additional training. Family medicine centered primary health care reform was a complex innovation, involving organizational, financial, clinical and relational changes. An important factor influencing the adoption of this complex innovation in RS was the perceived benefits of the innovation: benefits which accrue to the users, family physicians, nurses and policy makers. With political commitment, an enabling economic environment and equitable distribution of resources, comprehensive primary health has proved to be a better strategy in achieving the goal of health for all. However, although family medicine passed through long journey from imposition to partnership, there is still large place for the improvement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.200
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpsta medicina→Same topicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes→French-language works237,207→