MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967657265 · doi:10.1186/s13054-015-0927-4

Virtuous laughter: we should teach medical learners the art of humor

2015· review· en· W1967657265 on OpenAlexafffund
Simon Oczkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Critical Thinking Development
Canadian institutionsHamilton General Hospital
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsLaughterBurnoutMedicineVirtuous circle and vicious circleNursingMedical educationHealth carePsychologySocial psychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is increasing recognition of the stress and burnout suffered by critical care workers. Physicians have a responsibility to teach learners the skills required not only to treat patients, but to cope with the demands of a stressful profession. Humor has been neglected as a strategy to help learners develop into virtuous and resilient physicians. Humor can be used to reduce stress, address fears, and to create effective health care teams. However, there are forms of humor which can be hurtful or discriminatory. In order to maximize the benefits of humor and to reduce its harms, we need to teach and model the effective and virtuous use of humor in the intensive care unit.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical CareSame topicEducation and Critical Thinking DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207