Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In an article recently published in the Journal, Zelek and Phillips [1] attempt to identify some of the current context of the doctor – game as played at a Canadian hospital in January 2000. Some readers may appropriately ask What does this have to do with equity?, but personal experience suggests dysfunctional medical teamwork inevitably leads to diminishment in quality. The reasonable claim that lower quality medical care has a disproportionate effect on the less advantaged leads to the relevance of this topic to equity in health, in my opinion. The interpretations made by these authors appear reasonably self-evident. Anyone who has worked on a hospital ward in the United States or Canada will likely recognize in these vignettes strong similarities to personal observations and/or experiences. Res ipsa loquitur. But in matters this complex do gender and power represent the only two important variables? I can't help but think that temperament makes a large difference in physician – nurse interactions. Little has been published in the medical literature about this subject, but unpublished data indicate major differences among various medical careers on a test such as the Myers-Briggs. Do differences in career choices by temperament play a hidden role in studies such as the one by Zelek and Phillips? Most observers would likely agree that a comparison of neonatology, pediatrics and surgery would demonstrate great differences in temperament between each group, both at the nurse and physician level. During the late 20th century as the proportion of women among matriculating medical students increased markedly, the specialty selections of graduating physicians also shifted considerably, with women selecting areas such as pediatrics disproportionately. Is it possible that we have experienced a differential temperament shift as well? Could historical tensions between male physicians and female nurses be about temperament mismatches as much as about gender and power? Perhaps future research in this area will go beyond the traditional binary perspective and examine a more complex, but richer terrain.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».