Working Together to Build a Respectful Workplace: Transforming OR Culture
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Respect is important in the creation of a positive perioperative work environment and effective OR teams. Low scores for respect in the OR on an employee opinion survey and responses on a more customized survey that examined issues associated with respect prompted leaders at the University Health Network to undertake a multiyear organizational strategy to address respect and quality of worklife initiatives. An interprofessional quality of worklife task force convened to create an action plan to address the outcomes of the surveys. The work of the task force included developing and implementing a code of conduct team charter for the OR, empowering leaders to better manage conflict through education and coaching, creating a collaborative, consistent approach to conflict resolution, and designing an education strategy for staff members to enhance communication and conflict resolution. Results of recent employee opinion surveys have reflected positive outcomes. Efforts to sustain the effects of the project include quarterly recognition awards and ongoing education focused on wellness and communication skills.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it