MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991075168

Investigating demographics, physical activity intensity, and sedentary behaviour as predictors of burnout in first to fourth year medical students

2019· article· en· W2991075168 on OpenAlexaff
Tamara L. Morgan, Taylor McFadden, Michelle Fortier, Jennifer R. Tomasone, Shane N. Sweet

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport (SCAPPS refereed abstracts repository) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityQueen's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutDemographicsBayesian multivariate linear regressionSittingEthnic groupSpecialtyPopulationMedicineDemographyGerontologyPsychologyPhysical therapyLinear regressionClinical psychologyFamily medicineEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical students are at an increased risk for burnout compared to the general population (Dyrbye et al., 2014). Research has identified certain demographics as predictors of burnout in medical students (Cecil et al., 2014; Dyrbye et al., 2007; Dyrbye & Shanafelt, 2016), but most research has not examined a combination of demographic variables in one model. Moreover, physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour are two modifiable risk factors for burnout (Naczenski et al., 2017; Sloan et al., 2013). However, less is known about how PA intensities and sedentary behaviour influence burnout in medical students. This research investigated how demographics (gender, ethnicity, age, level of education, year of study, proposed specialty) and health behaviours (mild, moderate, and vigorous PA, and sitting) predicted burnout in medical students. Medical students (N=129) completed surveys of validated questionnaires assessing demographics, PA, sitting, and burnout. Data were analysed using multivariate linear regression. Results showed that female gender (?=.221, p=.016), 'other' ethnicity (?=.185, p=.040), third year (?=.435, p=

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport (SCAPPS refereed abstracts repository)Same topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207