Role of family physicians in an urban hospital: Tracking changes between 1977, 1997, and 2014.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate changes in family doctors' attitudes about and participation in hospital activities and inpatient care in an urban hospital family medicine department from 1977 to 1997 and 2014. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey design. SETTING: The Department of Family Medicine at St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton in Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Family physicians affiliated with the Department of Family Medicine at St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton were surveyed in 2014. Data were compared with findings from similar surveys administered at this institution in 1977 and 1997. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Family physicians' roles in hospital activities, attitudes toward the role of the family physician in the hospital setting, and the barriers to and facilitators of maintaining this role. RESULTS: A total of 93 physicians returned completed surveys (37.3% response rate). In 2014, half of the respondents provided some inpatient care. This patient care was largely supportive and newborn care (71.7% and 67.4%, respectively). In 2014, 47.3% believed the quality of care would suffer (compared with 92.1% in 1977 and 87.5% in 1997) if they were not involved in patient care in the hospital. There was also a considerable shift away from the 1977 and 1997 perception that the family physician had a role as patient advocate: 92.0% and 95.3%, respectively, compared with only 49.5% in the 2014 survey. CONCLUSION: Family physicians' hospital activities and attitudes continued to change from 1977 to 1997 and 2014 in this urban hospital setting. Most of the respondents had stopped providing direct inpatient care, with a few continuing to provide supportive care. Despite this, most respondents still see a role for the Department of Family Medicine within the hospital as a focus for identifying with their family physician community, a place to interact with other specialist colleagues, and a source of some continuing medical education.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".