MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163553871 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0250223

A cross-sectional workforce survey of three traditional and complementary medicine professions in Ontario, Canada

2021· article· en· W3163553871 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nadine Ijaz, Sandy Welsh, Qi Zhang, David Brulé, Heather Boon

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWorkforceNaturopathyAcupunctureMedicineDemographicsFamily medicineCross-sectional studyAlternative medicineTraditional medicineDemographySociologyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Workforce studies about traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) occupations in industrialized countries are scant; and, these occupations' position within the broader occupational workforce remains unclear. This study aims to address these gaps using a comparative approach. METHODS: Naturopaths, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) / acupuncture practitioners, and homeopaths in Ontario, Canada were surveyed regarding their demographics, practice characteristics and self-reported income. Results were compared with parallel data from within and outside of Ontario. RESULTS: Study response rate: 23.3% (n = 1205). While predominantly female (57.9%), Ontario's TCM/acupuncture profession was less feminized than the naturopathic (77.1%) and homeopathic (78.3%) groups. Naturopaths were significantly younger than, and reported fewer years of clinical experience than, the other two groups. About half of TCM/acupuncture practitioners, and almost one-third of homeopaths had trained outside of Canada, predominantly in East and South Asia, respectively. More TCM/acupuncture practitioners (58.9%) and homeopaths (57.6%) had multilingual clinical practices than naturopaths (19.1%). Homeopaths worked fewer hours and saw fewer patients per week than the other occupations. Self-reported mean incomes varied across groups, with naturopaths earning more on average ($63,834, SD $57,101) than did TCM/acupuncture practitioners ($45,624, SD $44,081) or homeopaths ($29,230, SD $41,645). Holding other variables constant, internationally-trained practitioners reported earning one-third less than their Canadian-trained counterparts. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS: Study findings echo occupationally-specific data from other industrialized jurisdictions; and, affirm that different T&CM occupations have distinctive demographic and practice characteristics. The demographic makeup of Ontario's TCM/acupuncture and homeopathy occupations suggests a role for these groups in delivering culturally-responsive care within Asian ethnic communities. T&CM practitioner incomes, in particular for internationally-trained practitioners, fell below the provincial population income median, and in many cases below the poverty line. T&CM occupations' relative socio-political marginality may be impacting clinicians' ability to earn a viable living.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.330
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.015 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207