The urological personality: is it unique?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop a preliminary characterization of the urological personality. METHODS: Thirty-four urology residents (29 male) from all eleven Canadian training programs anonymously completed the Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R(c)), a commercially available validated personality assessment tool in which participants agree or disagree with a compilation of 240 statements. A score is generated in each of five character traits according to the five factor theory of personality: extraversion (E), openness (O), conscientiousness (C), agreeableness (A) and neuroticism (N). The group mean on each scale was compared to the normative mean for the general adult population using one-sample, two-tailed t tests. RESULTS: Urology residents scored significantly higher than the general population on three of the five personality factors: extraversion (E) (p<.001), openness (O) (p<.02) and conscientiousness (C) (p<.05). There was no significant difference from norms in agreeableness (A) or neuroticism (N). CONCLUSIONS: The high scores in 'extraversion' reflect the social, warm, active and talkative nature of urology residents. As well, urology residents tend to be willing to entertain new ideas and are purposeful and determined based on their high scores on 'openness' and 'conscientiousness' respectively. Canadian urology residents possess a distinct personality in comparison to the general population. These provocative findings should be interpreted with caution. If confirmed on a wider basis, the data may be helpful in career counseling and resident selection. Future studies examining differences between the urological personality and other surgical subspecialties may further refine applications of the data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".