MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W410155293 · doi:10.1177/229255030401200207

Working for Free

2004· article· en· W410155293 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Russell Taylor

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Journal of Plastic Surgery · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineMedical physics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Surgeons believe in certain ideals. We believe we belong to a profession with intrinsic standards. These beliefs involve our duties to patients and our obligations to find the truth and patiently explain what we think in a way people can understand. We are translators and truth seekers and even though this sounds self-exalting, this is who we are. This explains the attractiveness of our work to idealistic young people, and even though the training is long, the goal is worthwhile. After extended training the time to earn a living has come, but it is a mistake to suppress our idealistic natures and concentrate only on finances. It is too easy to forget Wordsworth’s observation: “getting and spending, we lay waste our powers.” The best kept secret is: volunteer jobs are the best jobs. True, you don’t get paid, but you don’t pay tax either and you can learn things you would never learn any other way. You will develop a breadth of experience that your specialty practice would never allow. A specialty is focusing and that is one of its problems, it can be too focused. Doctors hate hospital committees, but committees are a good place to understand the bureaucratic mind and the world we live in. Hospitals need us to tell them when they have gone too far, and when they are proposing something doctors will not accept. Many draconian ideas are stopped in committee, and this is where your voice is needed. Imagine teaching plastic surgery. You might be the first plastic surgeon a medical student meets. Your inspiration could inspire a lifetime career. Explaining your experience to a trainee is an exercise in clarity and analysis. You will learn a great deal as a teacher. Imagine being chairperson of the ethics committee of a national surgical association. You would have the chance to find out what ethics are, how complaints are managed, and how ethics ideas change. No longer could you grumble about rules from Mount Olympus; you are now on the mount feeling fallible but understanding many sides of the questions and wondering how best to judge. You are seeking wisdom and fairness; representing and leading at the same time. The beauty of not being paid, even though the job is onerous and time consuming, is quite simple. You can never be successfully charged with staying in the job to feather your nest or as a paid lobbyist for one point of view. It is good to move on after a time and pass the job on to other colleagues. Imagine travelling to another country with a team of surgeons, nurses, and anesthetists to teach surgical techniques. You will make a difference and gain an understanding of the skill of surgeons abroad and what they need to improve outcomes. You will learn that surgeons abroad are very well trained, know many techniques, but don’t have the staff, equipment, drugs or instruments which you take for granted. You will understand, “it’s the economy, stupid.” You will learn that the surgeons you meet are far better at innovation and using what they have than you are. You will go to teach and be taught. You will be humbled by the gratitude shown by patients you help. Imagine working your way up the executive ladder of a local, provincial or national surgical association doing whatever duty is required and being involved in the debates of the issues as you take on various jobs along the way. These jobs are all unpaid, but think of the experience and insight you will gain. Imagine sitting on the governing councils of the provincial college as it decides issues regarding our profession. You will realize that the issues involved are far more complex and have greater implications than coffee room rants we enjoy as “stand-up entertainment.” Consider being on the board that chooses scholarship winners. You will find it very difficult to decide because the candidates are so well qualified, but you will bring your seasoned judgment to the task. Why volunteer? There is no pay, it takes time from your practice, and costs you money. You do it because you want to find out how things work. You do it to find out if you have skills other than surgery, and you do it because you believe it is worthwhile. In a cynical world where many actions are seen as self-promoting, you are an idealist and seek others like yourself. That is the reason you have to keep what you do quiet, for the more acclaim you get from volunteering, the more the reward ruins its intrinsic value. You do it because it is a good thing to do. If you find your practice less satisfying as the years go by, try some volunteering. It might be what the doctor ordered. John R Taylor

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,221
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,220
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,952

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,221
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,186
Tête enseignante GPT0,358
Écart entre enseignants0,172 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations6
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Journal of Plastic SurgeryMême sujetHealth and Medical Research ImpactsTravaux en français237 207