MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137298400 · doi:10.1136/bmj.38127.444838.63

Severe acute respiratory syndrome and its impact on professionalism: qualitative study of physicians' behaviour during an emerging healthcare crisis

2004· article· en· W2137298400 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sharon E. Straus, Kumanan Wilson, Gloria Rambaldini, Darlyne Rath, Yulia Lin, Wayne L. Gold, Moira K. Kapral

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careMedicineContext (archaeology)Qualitative researchDutyGrounded theoryConfidentialityDuty of careNursingFamily medicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To explore issues of medical professionalism in the context of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), a new emerging health threat. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews analysed with grounded theory methodology. SETTING: University hospitals in Toronto, Canada, during the SARS outbreak in 2003. PARTICIPANTS: 14 staff physicians from divisions of infectious diseases, general internal medicine, and critical care medicine. RESULTS: Of 14 attending physicians, four became ill during the outbreak. Participants described their experiences during the outbreak and highlighted several themes about values inherent to medical professionalism that arose during this crisis including the balance between care of patients and accepted personal risk, confidentiality, appropriate interactions between physicians and patients, ethical research conduct, and role modelling of professionalism for junior doctors. CONCLUSION: Despite concerns raised by professional societies about the erosion of professionalism, participants in this study amply demonstrated the necessary qualities during the recent healthcare crisis. However, there were several examples of strained professional behaviour witnessed by the participants and these examples highlight aspects of medical professionalism that medical educators and professional organisations should address in the future, including the balance between personal safety and duty of care.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.412 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations92
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207