Medical faculty's views and experiences of parental leave: a collaborative study by the Gender Issues Committee, Council of Ontario Faculties of Medicine.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine medical faculty's actual and ideal parental leave arrangements with the aim of informing policy decisions. Leave lengths, effect on career, financial arrangements, and availability of temporary replacements were explored. METHODS: All medical faculty (6387) in Ontario, Canada were surveyed by mail and asked about parental leave experiences since 1990. Responses of men and women were compared as were those of leave takers and the entire group. RESULTS: Thirty-two percent (n = 996) of the 3107 respondents were women and 68% (n = 2067) were men. Ninety-eight percent (n = 317) of new mothers had taken maternity leave, while only 21% (n = 159) of new fathers had. Both paid and unpaid leave was generally shorter than that allowed by law or identified as ideal. Parental leave had a somewhat negative effect on the careers of all faculty. Women were more worried than men about the effect of their absence on colleagues' work and more generous with ideal leave length and funding. Temporary replacement of leave takers was central to an effective leave policy. CONCLUSIONS: Institutional and academic culture may cause new parents to take suboptimal leave despite legislation allowing more. A change in the work environment is required for medicine to offer its teachers what it teaches--that infants benefit from nurturing, nursing, and stability early in life.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".