MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092964807 · doi:10.1080/10401334.2015.1011646

Resident Use of the Internet, E-Mail, and Personal Electronics in the Care of Surgical Patients

2015· article· en· W2092964807 on OpenAlex
Mathew A Plant, Joel Fish

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

VenueTeaching and Learning in Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe InternetPhoneElectronic mailMedicineMobile phonePsychologyInternet privacyFamily medicineWorld Wide WebComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of smartphones, e-mail, and the Internet has affected virtually all areas of patient care. Current university and hospital policies concerning the use of devices may be incongruent with day-to-day patient care. PURPOSE: The goal was to assess the current usage patterns of the Internet, e-mail, and personal electronics for clinical purposes by surgical residents as well as their communication habits and preferences. Also assessed was residents' knowledge regarding the institutional policies surrounding these issues. METHODS: Surgical residents (n = 294) at a large teaching institution were surveyed regarding their knowledge of university policies as well as daily use of various communication technologies. Communication preferences were determined using theoretical clinical scenarios. RESULTS: Our survey with a response rate of 54.7% (n = 161) revealed that 93.8% of participants indicated daily Internet use for clinical duties. Most respondents (72%) were either completely unaware of the existence of guidelines for its use or aware but had no familiarity with their content. Use of e-mail for clinical duties was common (85%), and 74% of the respondents rated e-mail as "very important" or "extremely important" for patient care. Everyone who responded had a mobile phone with 98.7% being "smartphones," which the majority (82.9%) stated was "very important" or "extremely important" for patient care. Text messaging was the primary communication method for 57.8% of respondents. The traditional paging system was the primary communication method for only 1.3% of respondents and the preferred method for none. CONCLUSIONS: Daily use of technology is the norm among residents; however, knowledge of university guidelines was exceedingly low. Residents need better education regarding current guidelines. Current guidelines do not reflect current clinical practice. Hospitals should consider abandoning the traditional paging system and consider facilitating better use of residents' mobile phones.

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)0.003
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 score0.260
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
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 integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.410
Teacher spread0.354 · 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