ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PROFESSIONALS TOWARDS REASONABLE CONSUMPTION
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Significance. “Responsible consumption and production”, numbered 12, is one of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals established by the United Nations. Health professionals are part of the social circle of the majority of the country's population. The level of trust in health professions makes it possible to believe that the lifestyle of doctors and people associated with healthcare (as well as the lifestyle of teachers, educators, media personalities) can often serve as an example to follow in terms of responsible consumption provided the media develops and raises awareness of its significance. The purpose of this study is to measure the attitude of health professionals towards responsible consumption. Material and methods. Attitudes were measured via a questionnaire developed by the research team. The electronic survey included 2923 respondents signed in the "Doctor's guide" mobile application, including doctors - 65% (Group 1), nursing staff -9% (Group 2) and students and technical staff - 26% (Group 3). Frequency comparison was undertaken using Chi-squared test. Relevant risk and potential error were calculated. Data analysis was carried out using Microsoft Excel 2016. Results. With a more frequent declaration of the need for waste sorting, doctors in everyday life practice it less often than nurses: 39.7% vs. 46.6%. More than 5% of the respondents believe that there are no waste processing enterprises in Russia at all. Only a quarter of the respondents explain their disengagement in waste sorting for recycling by personal traits and motives. More than a tenth of the respondents are ready to engage in waste sorting only if there are incentives or prohibitions, more than 5% associate their unwillingness with the lack of skills to sort waste, as well as the presence of strong opponents to waste sorting in their inner circle. There was no difference in the distribution of the responses across all three groups of the respondents about the dual system of municipal waste sorting (everything that belongs to the category of “recyclables” must be thrown in the blue container) operating in the Republic of Tatarstan and the Moscow region. Almost 14% of the surveyed health professionals neither had the slightest idea about this system or plan to sort waste, while about 55% did not know, but are going to use this system. Half of those who knew about the dual sorting system (15.9% of the respondents) doubt that it can be trusted. A fifth of the respondents do not know where to dispose of hazardous household waste that cannot be thrown in a regular waste container and note that there are no hazardous waste drop-off sites. Conclusion. The study demonstrates that health professionals have a low commitment to responsible consumption. As to medical disposables, doctors consider their replacement with reusable analogues acceptable and rational more often than nurses. In general, health professionals do not share the idea of a long-term and careful use of household items with a possible subsequent donation or re-sale.
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.
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 | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 | 0,000 |
| 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 découle