Physician assistants in primary care: making an impact in Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physician Assistants (PAs) are being employed in various sites in Manitoba, and in several specialties and subspecialties including primary care. This study aimed to describe the work PAs in primary care are doing, explore the demographics of their patients, assess their job satisfaction, and examine their contributions to healthcare. Several questionnaires were constructed and distributed to PAs who graduated from Master of Physician Assistant Studies at the University of Manitoba and are currently working in primary care. The questions that were asked were divided up into: the reasons the PAs specialized in primary care, their practise environment, patient population, schedules, job satisfaction, professional concerns, and their contributions to healthcare. The results of the primary care PA survey show that in Manitoba primary care PAs generally chose to enter primary care for the breadth and challenge of the practise. They are happy to remain in this speciality, and they are working in a variety of settings. Many of the PAs have variation in the numbers of physicians they report to and the type of patients they serve. The demographic data shows that PAs are generally dealing with patients of both genders and from a wide spectrum of minorities and socioeconomic levels. Overall the job satisfaction of the PAs is exceptional, and their satisfaction with their patients, supervisory physicians, and other staff and health care providers is outstanding.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".