MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Non-physician anaesthetists: can we agree on their role in Europe?

2001· article· en· W4254093529 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. Péronnet

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Value (mathematics)Anticipation (artificial intelligence)State (computer science)NursingFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In association with Dr Gentili's comments [1] about Vickers' article [2] on the role of non-physician anaesthetists I should like to express my concern as a French consultant anaesthesiologist working in the public sector. In France, a quarter of all emergencies, and 39% of night-time and obstetric emergencies, are treated in our non-university hospitals [3] where the lack of physician anaesthetists is acute. Most of these hospitals require the help of affiliated foreign physicians. The role of the non-physician anaesthetists (nurse anaesthetists) who are under our direction is important: a recent strike by these nurses demonstrated their value. I do not agree with the idea of setting out to introduce and enhance nurse anaesthetists in our public hospitals. In my view it was a lack of anticipation and policy of the state administration and of the French Council of Medicine that instituted two tenets into medical and specialized training. First, and this goes back a long time, a numerus clausus diminished the opportunity for French candidates to gain admission to medical schools with the unrealistic objective of reducing the cost of providing public health. The second tenet for admission of medical students to all medical specialities took place in the 1990s for the same reasons. The French State became aware of the problem for the first time last year and then allowed 300 non-European affiliated and less well-paid physicians to take the French examination; if they were successful they could progress to become anaesthetic consultants and be permitted to remain in France with decent career prospects. If the scientific knowledge of the candidates is adequate, this will be the first step to improve medical anaesthesiology in our public hospitals. We realize this solution represents a brain drain from countries that may ill-afford such losses. Moreover, it is unfair to our own French students, because the policy to deliberately restrict the number of places that are available (numerus clausus) results in intense competition for entry to the second year of the medical schools (the success rate is 12–15% usually, and only two attempts are permitted). To become a specialist, the students (usually during the 5th or 6th year of medical school) have to pass a second competitive examination, the ‘internat’ (with a success rate of approximately 50%): this provides about 1700 specialists every year – for every specialty! However, if the State and the Medical Council persist in this lack of anticipation, will France be able to attract enough French-speaking foreign colleagues?

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.804
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologySame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207