MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1908519441 · doi:10.36834/cmej.36663

Resident work hours: why keeping the status quo may not be such a bad thing

2013· article· en· W1908519441 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Roshan Razik, Marat Slessarev

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHospital Admissions and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatus quoWork (physics)Perspective (graphical)Government (linguistics)Variety (cybernetics)Affect (linguistics)DutyPublic relationsMedical educationMedicinePolitical scienceEngineering ethicsPsychologyComputer scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resident duty hours have become an increasingly debated topic in post-graduate medical education. Work-hour restrictions have been implemented for first-year residents in the US and more recently for all residents in Quebec. Current and future work-hour rules affect a variety of stakeholders: government, hospitals, residency training programs, patients, and most of all residents. In this article, we hope to examine the issue from a Canadian perspective and delineate some of the reasons why changing the current call structure may have potentially deleterious effects to all those concerned.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicHospital Admissions and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207