MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391017198 · doi:10.5937/smclk4-47454

How available are specialist medical doctors in Montenegro?

2023· article· en· W4391017198 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lidija Šćepanović, Goran Kecojević, Milan Mirković

Bibliographic record

VenueSrpski medicinski casopis Lekarske komore · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontenegroSpecialtyFamily medicineMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Public healthPopulationPublic sectorDescriptive statisticsNursingEnvironmental healthGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Health workers, especially highly skilled and trained staff, with their knowledge, experience, and skills, should enable the implementation of health policy, with the aim of preserving and improving the health of the population. The aim of this study was to determine the availability of medical doctors and specialist medical doctors in Montenegro, by type of specialization, i.e., to determine their age and gender structure, as compared to other countries in the European Region (ER). Materials and methods: Medical doctors (specialists, residents, and medical doctors without specialist training) represented the unit of observation in this study. In addition to the application of descriptive methods (absolute and relative numbers), indices of change in the number of doctors for the period between 2009 and 2021, indices of change in the age structure of doctors for the period between 2008 and 2021, indices of change in the prevalence of specialist doctors aged above 55 years (55+), by specialty, were calculated, as well as the density of different specialists per 100,000 population. Data related to the public sector, collected and published by the Institute of Public Health of Montenegro, were used. Results: The total number of doctors (specialists, residents, and medical doctors without specialist training) in Montenegro, in 2021, in the public sector, was by a third higher than in 2009, while the number of specialists increased by a quarter. The increase in the number of specialist medical personnel was significantly higher in hospitals, as compared to outpatient facilities (increase in the number of specialist doctors by 46% and residents by 41%, compared to 23% and 5% in outpatient facilities). In 2021, the highest percentage of specialist staff was in the age group of 55 years and above (about 34%). Conclusion: The aforementioned statistical series of data, related to specialist doctors, residents, and medical doctors without specialist training, in outpatient and inpatient health care, indicate a significant shortage of these doctors in Montenegro, as compared to most countries in the European Region, as well as an inadequate age structure, especially for certain specialties where careful human resources planning should be applied. Better and more efficient management of human resources should provide for young doctors to begin with specialist training sooner.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSrpski medicinski casopis Lekarske komoreSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207