A Survey of After-Hours Interventional Radiology Availability in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: A survey to determine the availability of after-hours IR on-call services at Ontario hospitals that have a radiology department. A secondary outcome is to determine potential barriers to the provision of IR after-hours on call services within the province. Methods: A survey was created and distributed to the radiology department heads across Ontario during a 6-week period in 2024. Results: The survey was sent to the department heads at 73 hospitals across the province of Ontario. Survey completion rate was 41% (30/73). Two thirds of the respondents had formal IR divisions (20/30, 66.7%). A total of 14 hospitals with IR departments offered on call services (70%, 14/20) and 2 of the hospitals without IR departments (2/10, 20%) offered on call services for non-vascular IR procedures (eg, abscess drainage). 92.9% of the groups offering IR call services stated year-over-year demand was increasing. The most common barrier to after-hours services were staffing resources. Conclusion: After-hours IR services have limited availability in the province of Ontario, and not all hospitals with IR departments currently provide after-hours access to IR procedures. The main barrier to provision of after-hours services is the lack of health human resources, in particular IR physicians.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".