MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2775568464

Factors Influencing Family Medicine Resident Retention and Newly Graduated Physicians’ First Practice Location

2017· article· en· W2775568464 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yvonne Anisimowicz, Baukje Miedema, Julie Easley, Andrea Bowes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d’études sur le Nouveau-Brunswick · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic shortageMedical practiceFamily medicineMedicineMedical educationGovernment (linguistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The New Brunswick Medical Society states that New Brunswick has a shortage of physicians. This study examines retention of newly graduated family physicians from the Dalhousie University family medicine residency sites in New Brunswick from 2005– 2014, and factors influencing physicians’ choices of first practice locations. Approximately half of respondents remained in New Brunswick to establish their first practice. The majority who left New Brunswick to establish their first practice have not returned, whereas most who remained still practice in New Brunswick. Choice of first practice location was influenced by a combination of personal and professional factors. Reasons for leaving New Brunswick were predominantly personal.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.262 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of New Brunswick Studies / Revue d’études sur le Nouveau-BrunswickSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207