MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200037712 · doi:10.4103/cjrm.cjrm_88_20

Trauma experiences of rural practitioners: A self assessment

2021· article· en· W4200037712 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
MohammadAli Jamil, Rizwan Malik, James Stempien, Donna Goodridge, TaofiqO Oyedokun

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Rural Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThoracentesisEmergency medicineFamily medicineMedical emergencySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to identify, through self-assessment, how comfortable rural emergency medicine (EM) physicians are in treating critically ill trauma patients, the resources available to treat such patients and their comfort with performing trauma procedures. METHODS: An anonymous self-assessment survey was e-mailed to family physicians practising rural EM in Saskatchewan regarding training, hospital resources, demographics and self-reported comfort with rural trauma management. We included physicians who had provided EM care within the past year in Saskatchewan outside of the major trauma centres. Comfort was measured on a Likert scale. RESULTS: One hundred thirteen physicians out of a total of 479 physicians contacted agreed to participate (23.6%). Thirty-nine percent (n = 31) of respondents were comfortable with paediatric trauma, and 46% (n = 37) were comfortable with vascular trauma. Nineteen percent (n = 15) were comfortable with pericardiocentesis and 25% (n = 19) were comfortable with cricothyroidotomy. In the past 12 months, 21% (n = 17) had performed paediatric endotracheal intubation, 1.3% (n = 1) had performed cricothyroidotomy, 28.8% (n = 23) had performed needle thoracentesis and 20% (n = 16) had performed central venous line access. Those who did their residency training outside of Canada were more comfortable with overall trauma care. Those who had taken emergency department echo were generally more comfortable with trauma procedures. Those who had current advanced trauma life support were more comfortable with less frequently encountered aspects of trauma care. CONCLUSIONS: This self-assessment helped us identify which aspects of rural trauma medicine are the most challenging for rural practitioners. It gave us an understanding of the procedures related to trauma medicine that are the most difficult, which critical resources are available and where training could be focused to benefit rural emergency physicians.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Rural MedicineSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207