Variation in the Geographic Distribution of Physiotherapy Student Clinical Placements in Rural Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Rural and remote Saskatchewan has a shortage of physiotherapists. Positive student experiences in rural and remote communities may influence whether graduates choose to work in these settings. The intention of the first full-time, 4-week clinical placement (CP) in the Master of Physical Therapy programme at the University of Saskatchewan is to provide clinical experiences in rural settings outside Saskatoon and Regina. This study examines the geographic distribution of and yearly variation in these CPs to determine whether this stated intent is being realized. Method: We analyzed the locations of physiotherapy student CPs from 2008 to 2016 using geospatial mapping. Results: Spatial patterning using mapping identified variability in the number of rural placements in geographical regions in Saskatchewan over a 9-year period. An average of 75% of CP experiences occurred in rural locations outside the two major cities in Saskatchewan between 2008 and 2016 (ranging from 58% in 2015 to 84% in 2009). Conclusions: The goal of providing all University of Saskatchewan physiotherapy students with a rural experience for their first CP is not being met. Securing more CPs in rural settings may have a positive impact on recruitment of physiotherapists to these communities.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".