Redefining work engagement: identity crisis and the quest for meaning at work of family physicians in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Access to primary healthcare is an important challenge in many countries, posing significant problems for population health and health equity. While family physicians' (FPs) dedication is considered essential to increase access to primary care, several indications of a certain demobi-lization, even a deeper disengagement, among FPs has emerged. Using a specific case, that of FPs in the province of Quebec (Canada), this article aims to capture the processes that lead these professionals to redefine their work engagement by exploring various tensions that permeate their practice and impact meaning at work. The findings presented in this article are based on the analysis of 35 individual semi-directed interviews with FPs from three labor market integration cohorts (early-, mid- and late-career) working in various care settings. Our findings suggest that the tensions experienced related to the representation of family medicine, career expectations and personal aspirations lead many FPs to redefine their work engagement over the course of their professional journey. While physicians consistently demonstrate strong commitment to their patients, many disengage from work environments that impose practices contrary to their professional values and how they define high-quality family medi-cine, as well as conditions that hinder their involvement in family life.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".