110 Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP): Survey of Access & Utilization by Pediatric Health Care Providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Primary Subject area Public Health and Preventive Medicine Background Canada is currently facing an increasing number of refugees and refugee claimants, yet Canadian health professionals are underutilizing the system intended to provide these individuals with healthcare. The Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) provides temporary healthcare coverage for those who are ineligible for provincial or territorial insurance, including resettled refugees and asylum seekers. Research suggests there are ongoing challenges around the program such as who is covered and what services are covered. Objectives The objective of this study was to assess Canadian pediatricians’ current understanding and utilization of the IFHP, and perceived barriers to its utilization. Design/Methods A one-time survey was administered via the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program. The ten question adaptive survey was available in English or French, in either paper or electronic format. Survey responses were collected for 6 weeks in early 2020 with two reminders sent prior to survey closing. In addition to descriptive statistics, multinomial logistic regressions were built to examine pediatrician use of the IFHP, work with IFHP-covered patients, and provider characteristics associated with registration and use. Results Of the 2,753 pediatricians and pediatric subspecialists surveyed, there were 1006 respondents (36.5% response rate). 52.2% of respondents had provided care to the IFHP-eligible patients in the previous 6 months. Of those participants, only 26.4% were registered IFHP providers, and just 10% could identify all services covered by the IFHP (Figure 1). Knowledge of 80% or more of supplemental benefits was associated with registration status (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.92; 95% CI 1.09 - 3.37). Amongst those who knew they were not registered, 70.2% indicated they did not know they had to register. aOR demonstrated that those with fewer years of practice had higher odds of not knowing that they had to register (aOR 1.22; 95% CI 1.01 - 1.49) Conclusion We demonstrate that the IFHP is poorly utilized by pediatric providers, with low registration rates and poor understanding of the IFHP-covered supplemental services, even among those who have recently provided care to the IFHP-eligible patients. Efforts to improve registration and knowledge of the IFHP are essential to improving access to health care for refugee children and youth. Funding: Study funded by the CPSP Resident Research Grant
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".