MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1545996036 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v7n5p320

Sharp Injuries Among Medical Students

2015· article· en· W1545996036 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Iman Ghasemzadeh, Mitra Kazerooni, Parivash Davoodian, Yaghoob Hamedi, Payam Sadeghi

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHormozgan University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicineTechnicianPopulationFamily medicineCross-sectional studyOccupational safety and healthNursingEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Sharp injuries threaten the health of healthcare employees. They cause the transmission of many diseases such as hepatitis B and C, AIDS, etc., which can increase the associated costs associated with them. The aim of this study was to investigate the frequency of sharp injuries among the students of Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences. METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted during 2012-2013 in Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, IR Iran. The target population consisted of the medical, nursing, midwifery, operating room technician, and medical laboratory students in the 2012-2013 academic year. Census sampling was conducted, and accordingly, 500 students participated in the study Data was collected using modified questionnaire of the University of San Diego's injury report form. The collected data were entered into SPSS V.19 and analyzed using descriptive statistical tests. FINDINGS: Finally 377 students (75.4%) returned the questionnaire. Among the studied students, 184 students (39.3%) had had sharp injuries. The frequency of damaging Vein puncture was the most common mechanism of injury DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION: The prevalence of sharp injuries is high among students which can increase the risk of disease and its subsequent risks, and thus, increase the cost and stress among students. It seems that holding workshops and increasing students' awareness and skills to face these risks can be effective in mitigating them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.407 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicInfection Control in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207