Best practice: quality assessment outcomes of the Practice Enhancement Program among family physicians in Saskatchewan, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased family physician workloads have strained primary care. The objective of this study was to describe the frequency and types of quality concerns identified among Saskatchewan's family physicians, changes in these concerns over time, associated physician characteristics, and recommendations made for improvement. In this repeated cross-sectional study (1997-2020), we examined family physician assessment reports from the Saskatchewan Practice Enhancement Program, a mandatory practice review strategy, for quality concerns on three outcomes: care, medical record, and facility. We recorded demographic and practice characteristics, the presence or absence of quality concerns, and the type of recommendations made. Concern incidence was calculated both overall and across subperiods, and three outcome-specific multiple logistic regression models were developed. Recommendations made were quantified, and their nature was evaluated using thematic analysis. Among 824 assessments, 20.8% identified concerns, with a statistically significant increase in 2015-20 over earlier years (14.2% versus 43.4%, P < .001). Corresponding proportions also significantly increased within each quality outcome (6.0%-37.1%, P < .001 for care concerns; 12.7%-19.6%, P = .03 for medical record concerns; 3.9%-21.0%, P < .001 for facility concerns). We found statistically significant adjusted associations between care concerns and both urban location [odds ratio (OR): 2.2; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.30, 3.8] and international medical training (OR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.34, 4.2); facility concerns and solo practice (OR: 2.5 95% CI: 1.10, 5.7); and medical record concerns and male gender (OR: 1.88; 95% CI: 1.09, 3.3), solo practice (OR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.01, 2.7), and increased age. Reflecting a statistically significant interaction found between age as a continuous covariate and time period, older physicians were more likely to have a medical record concern in later years (OR: 1.072; 95% CI: 1.026, 1.120) compared to earlier ones (OR: 1.021; 95% CI: 1.001, 1.043). Among physicians where a concern was identified, recommendations most frequently pertained to documentation (91.2%), chronic disease management (78.2%), cumulative patient profiles (62.9%), laboratory investigations (53.5%), medications (51.8%), and emergency preparedness (51.2%). A concerning and increasing proportion of family physicians have quality gaps, with identifiable factors and recurring recommendations. These findings provide direction for strategic support development.
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".