MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793921603 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2018.25426

The Healthcare Environment: A Perfect Ecosystem for Growing Shame

2018· article· en· W2793921603 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicLeadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Patient Safety Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShameCoping (psychology)Health carePsychologySocial psychologyApplied psychologyPublic relationsNursingEnvironmental resource managementPsychotherapistPolitical scienceMedicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The expression "shame and blame" has often been used to describe the culture within healthcare when a mistake is made. There has been little exploration, however, on the shame healthcare professionals experience after a mistake. Based on an original grounded theory study on the psychological impact of mistakes on health professionals, this article explores why the healthcare environment is a perfect ecosystem for growing shame, how individuals are coping or not coping with the negative effects of this powerful emotion and what might be done at the system, organizational and team level to mitigate these negative effects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.276 · 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