MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996827193 · doi:10.1136/bmj.l6971

Working as a doctor in Canada

2019· article· en· W2996827193 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Helen Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaEconomic shortageImmigrationWork (physics)Quality (philosophy)Economic growthPolitical scienceGeographyBusinessMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the past four years, Canada has been ranked as the best country in the world for quality of life, a measure that covers everything from housing to education and the environment. With its wide open spaces, sophisticated cities, and active lifestyle, it is a popular destination for doctors seeking new challenges abroad and a better work-life balance. Canada has an ongoing shortage of locally trained medical staff which is likely to continue for some time. Statistics Canada estimates that 4.5 million people across the country are without a family doctor and the Canadian health authorities are actively recruiting overseas doctors to fill the gaps. Nova Scotia, the Canadian province with the most acute shortage, has sent representatives from the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Nova Scotia together with provincial immigration officials to medical recruitment fairs in the UK. Canada suffers from …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0040.004

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.390 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207