The Effects of Acute Stress on Performance: Implications for Health Professions Education
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
PURPOSE: This paper is a review of representative research on the impact of acute stressors on the clinical performance of individuals and teams. METHOD: The Sciences Citation Index, Medline, and Psychinfo were used to search for articles up to and including 2008. The search terms were stress/tension/arousal/anxiety/cortisol/threat, cognition/skills/memory/attention/problem solving/decision making/performance, stress reduction/stress exposure/stress management/stress inoculation, and health professionals/medicine/medical students/residents/physicians/teams. The search was limited to papers in English from all developed countries. Secondary references were selected from primary papers. RESULTS: Elevated stress levels can impede performance on tasks that require divided attention, working memory, retrieval of information from memory, and decision making. These effects appear to be determined by the individual's appraisal of the demands and resources of a situation, the relationship between the stressor and the task, and factors such as coping styles, locus of control, and social supports. CONCLUSIONS: Given the potential negative impact of stress on performance, and the individualistic way in which people respond, medical educators might want to consider avenues for training learners in stress management. More research is needed to fully understand the contributions of personal factors such as coping style and locus of control, as well as the relationship of perceptions of stress to issues such as fatigue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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