39 Developmental Pediatrics Canadian Workforce Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Children with complex developmental needs may require assistance from a developmental pediatric specialist to complete specialized assessments, treatments, and therapies. Despite reports of large waiting lists at many academic centres, there is no workforce information regarding developmental pediatric care in Canada. Prior surveys of the developmental pediatric workforce in the United States have suggested that the pipeline of new trainees completing sub-specialty residency in developmental pediatrics may not be sufficient to meet predicted needs. Objectives In an effort to capture demographic data to understand the current developmental pediatric workforce, we conducted a survey to determine: 1) the demographic profile of developmental pediatric professionals who comprise the current workforce and their career plans; 2) the challenges and trends needing to be considered for future resource planning; and 3) opportunities for innovative care provision within developmental pediatrics. Design/Methods The workforce subcommittee of the Developmental Pediatrics Specialty Committee of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) drafted a 26-item questionnaire. This cross-sectional survey was pilot tested, and guided by a previous instrument used by the American Academy of Pediatrics. The study population included practicing developmental pediatricians in Canada, who were sent an email link from the RCPSC inviting them to respond. Data analysis was completed using descriptive statistics. Results A total of 145 participants completed the study (91% response rate). Forty-five percent of the responding developmental pediatricians have >20 years of experience. Within the next three to five years, 23% of the respondents plan to retire completely from practice. Trends influencing workforce planning were identified including the influence of government funding resources for specific neurodevelopmental disorders (32% of responses), requirements for translation services (70% of responses), and coordination issues with multi-disciplinary assessments (64% of responses). Top ranked priorities for innovative care provision in this specialty included further collaborations with community mental health agencies, capacity building in Autism Spectrum Disorder diagnosis, and an increased focus on care navigation efficiencies. Conclusion There are concerning trends present in the demographic distribution of developmental pediatricians given upcoming retirements and increasing service demands. Targeted advocacy to promote capacity building and recruitment to the specialty may be needed to ensure service needs continue to be met.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".