Personal finances of urology residents in Canada.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We examined how Urology residents in Canada manage their personal finances. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey instrument was designed to elicit information on demographics, expenses, savings and incomes. The questionnaire was completed by 40 Urology residents attending the 2000 Queen's Urology Exam Skills Training (QUEST) program. RESULTS: Twenty-eight residents (70%) had educational debt (median debt $50 000). Seventeen residents (45%) paid credit card interest charges within the last year. Four residents (10%) maintained an unpaid credit card balance > $7500 at 17% annual interest rate. Twenty-six residents (67%) contributed to Registered Retirement Savings Program (RRSP) accounts. Seventeen residents (44%) contributed to non-RRSP retirement accounts. Nineteen residents (50%) budgeted expenses. Median resident income was $45 000. Thirteen residents (34%) had cash reserves < $250. CONCLUSION: Many residents save little, and incur substantial debt over and above educational loans. Many residents would benefit from instruction concerning prudent financial management. Residents should be informed of the consequences of low saving and high debt.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".