Patient Experience With Primary Care Physician Assistants in Ontario, Canada: Impact of Trust, Knowledge, and Access to Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physician assistants (PAs) have been integrated into primary care settings to reduce wait times and to optimize continuity of care. Though previous studies suggest that PA utilization leads to improved healthcare access, few studies have investigated patient experience with primary care PAs in Canada. The objective of this study is to explore patient perspectives on primary care PAs in Ontario. A patient survey was developed and distributed to patients seen by PAs in 4 family medicine practices across Ontario, Canada. Results demonstrate that many patients are highly satisfied with their experience including the PA's ability to address their medical needs, establish rapport, and provide fast access to care (including same-day and after-hours appointments). Despite preferring to see a physician for more complex concerns, participants felt that PAs demonstrate similar medical knowledge, competencies, and scope of practice as family physicians. Patients demonstrated a solid understanding of the PA role and recognized the collaborative PA-physician relationship. These findings describe successful patient awareness and acceptance of the PA profession, largely due to positive PA-patient interactions in family medicine settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".