MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006648387

Progress made on access to rural health care in Canada

2020· article· en· W3006648387 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. Ruth Wilson, James Rourke, Ivy Oandasan, Carmela Bosco

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed Central · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsCollege of Family Physicians of CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRural areaAccountabilityWork (physics)Rural healthPsychological interventionPublic relationsHealth carePolitical scienceMedicineBusinessPublic administrationEconomic growthNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe the progress of the Rural Road Map Implementation Committee (RRMIC) on implementing the Rural Road Map for Action (RRM). COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE: The RRMIC is co-sponsored by the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada and has a broad membership that deliberately crosses sectors supporting the RRM’s social accountability vision. Committee members are either decision makers or maintain influential positions as part of the organizations they represent and are chosen based on their knowledge of and influence to advance the RRM. METHODS: The RRMIC was formed in February 2018 to support the implementation of the RRM. The RRMIC is designed to provide a forum whereby member organizations can report and deliberate on how to further advance the RRM in ways that can be scaled and spread locally, provincially, and at a pan-Canadian level. REPORT: Canadians living in rural communities continue to experience challenges in accessing rural health care. Rural communities have difficulty attracting and retaining family physicians, as policy interventions focus on the short term rather than the long term. Policy decisions are often guided by urban health care models without understanding the potential negative effects in rural communities. Rural communities need rural-based solutions and to develop a regional capacity to innovate, experiment, and discover what works. In response to these challenges, the RRM was developed in February 2017. The RRM is a series of recommendations for a renewed pan-Canadian approach to rural physician work force planning and provides a pathway forward, developing a comprehensive rural health framework to improve access to safe, high-quality health care for rural Canadians close to home. While considerable progress has been made by the RRMIC on key priority actions from the RRM, much work still needs to be done through collective and collaborative efforts as well as partnerships among stakeholders such as leaders, health care providers, administrators of health care institutions, and those who work and live among and provide care for rural populations, as well as rural communities themselves. Collaborative partnerships and commitments from all key stakeholders will be critical to addressing national and regional health work force needs in order to ensure equitable access to health care for rural Canada.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed CentralSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207