MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166607197 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.1031613

Trainee fatigue: Are new limits on work hours enough?

2004· letter· en· W2166607197 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Steven K. Howard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2004
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsSurpriseSleep deprivationNight workWork (physics)Sleep (system call)Sleep lossWork hoursMedicineComputer sciencePsychologyShift workPsychiatryCircadian rhythmInternal medicineSocial psychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It should come as no surprise that working in a busy hospital environment for 60 to 80 hours each week engenders a significant amount of sleep deprivation, with all of the attendant physiologic consequences. Sleep deprivation of the magnitude experienced by medical trainees has been shown to impair

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)0.014
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0330.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.244 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations20
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicSleep and Work-Related FatigueFrench-language works237,207