MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998312294 · doi:10.1188/07.onf.93-99

A New Way of Thinking About Fatigue: A Reconceptualization

2007· review· en· W1998312294 on OpenAlex
Kärin Olson

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology nursing forum · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCINAHLMedicineMEDLINEQualitative researchMedical educationPsychotherapistNursingPsychologyPsychological interventionSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To present a reconceptualization of fatigue. DATA SOURCES: Studies indexed in CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, Psyc INFO, SPORTDiscus, and CancerLit from 1995-2004; studies included in the bibliographies of indexed articles; and five qualitative studies conducted by the author. DATA SYNTHESIS: Tiredness and exhaustion are conceptually distinct from fatigue. All three concepts are located along an adaptational continuum in a manner consistent with stress theory. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions should focus on the elimination or reduction of stressors and the increase of patients' resistance to stressors. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Interventions that prevent or delay progression from tiredness to fatigue will be different from those that prevent or delay progression from fatigue to exhaustion.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.335 · 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