MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315607565 · doi:10.36834/cmej.74205

Characteristics of Canadian physicians and their associations with practice patterns: a scoping review

2022· review· en· W4315607565 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Ariana Mihan, Nicole Kester, M. Fitzgerald, Karine Fournier, Claire Kendall

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaBruyère
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsWorkforceScopusSocioeconomic statusMEDLINEContext (archaeology)Ethnic groupMedicineFamily medicineRuralityRural areaPopulationEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Physician characteristics such as education and sociodemographic attributes are associated with particular practice patterns, such as practice in rural settings. Understanding the Canadian context of such associations can inform medical school recruitment and health workforce decision-making. Objective: The objective of this scoping review was to report the nature and extent of the literature on associations between characteristics of physicians in Canada and physicians' practice patterns. Eligibility criteria: We included studies reporting associations between 1) the education or sociodemographic attributes of practicing physicians or residents in Canada and 2) practice patterns, including career choice, practice setting, and populations served. Methods: We searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE (R) ALL, Embase, ERIC, Education Source and Scopus) for quantitative primary studies and reviewed reference lists of included studies for additional studies. Data were extracted using a standardized data charting form. Results: Our search yielded 80 studies. Sixty-two examined education, evenly divided between undergraduate and postgraduate. Fifty-eight examined physicians' attributes, most focusing on sex/gender. The majority of studies focused on the outcome of practice setting. We found no studies examining race/ethnicity or socioeconomic status. Conclusion: Many studies in our review found positive associations between (i) rural training or rural background and rural practice setting and (ii) location of training or physicians' origin and practice in that location, consistent with previous literature. Associations for sex/gender were mixed, suggesting it may be a less useful target for workforce planning or recruitment aiming to address gaps in health care provision. More research is needed on the association of characteristics, particularly race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status, with career choice and populations served.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0310.062
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.476
Teacher spread0.398 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207