MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399775956 · doi:10.1186/s12960-024-00911-2

Physician assistants/associates in psychiatry: a workforce analysis

2024· article· en· W4399775956 on OpenAlexaff
Mirela Bruza‐Augatis, Andrzej Kozikowski, Roderick S. Hooker, Kasey Puckett

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Resources for Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsNational Capital Commission
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceMedicinePacific islandersHealth services researchFamily medicinePsychiatryPublic healthNursingPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Physician assistants/associates (PAs) provide services in diverse medical specialties globally, including psychiatry. While health professionals in psychiatry have been described for many years, little is known about PAs practicing in this discipline. METHODS: We describe US PAs practicing in psychiatry using robust national data from the National Commission on Certification of Physician Assistants (NCCPA). Analyses included descriptive and inferential statistics comparing PAs in psychiatry to PAs in all other medical and surgical specialties. RESULTS: The percentage of PAs practicing in psychiatry has increased from 1.1% (n = 630) in 2013 to 2.0% (n = 2 262) in 2021. PAs in psychiatry differed from PAs practicing in all other specialties in the following: they identified predominately as female (71.4% vs. 69.1%; p = 0.016), were more racially diverse (Asian [6.6% vs. 6.0%], Black/African American [5.5% vs. 3.4%], multi-race [2.8% vs. 2.1%], and other races [Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, American Indian/Alaska Native, or other; 3.7% vs. 3.6%]; p < 0.001), and resided in the South (43.8% vs. 34.1%; p < 0.001). PAs in psychiatry vs. all other specialties were more likely to work in office-based private practice settings (41.6% vs. 37.3%; p < 0.001) and nearly twice as likely to provide telemedicine services for their patients (62.7% vs. 32.9%; p < 0.001). While one-third (31.9%) of PAs in psychiatry experienced one or more burnout symptoms, and 8.1% considered changing their current position, the vast majority of PAs in psychiatry (86.0%) were satisfied with their position. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the attributes of PAs in psychiatry is essential in medical labor supply and demand research. Our findings suggest that the number of PAs working in psychiatry is steadily increasing. These PAs were predominantly female, exhibited greater racial diversity, and were primarily located in the South and Midwest regions of the US. A striking difference was that PAs in psychiatry were almost twice as likely to provide telemedicine services for their patients. Although nearly a third of PAs in psychiatry acknowledged having one or more symptoms of burnout, few were considering changing their employment, and the vast majority reported high job satisfaction.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.422 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Resources for HealthSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207