MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3169307858 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.7224

Burnout among caregivers in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic: Insights and challenges

2021· review· en· W3169307858 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Julie Franc-Guimond, Valérie Hogues

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakHealth careSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PsychologyNursingMedicinePolitical scienceClinical psychologyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The arrival of COVID-19 modified the way we live, care, teach, and self-care tremendously. Indeed, our personal and professional lives were much affected, and despite the fact that Canadian healthcare workers (HCW) and systems had some time to prepare in comparison to other countries, we faced a scenario that resembled no other. Adding the negative effects of a never-before-seen pandemic to the already well-known risk of burnout among HCW could surely increase the likelihood of colleagues, as well as ourselves, being affected. We hereby reviewed the numerous factors that could increase the risk of burnout amid this ongoing pandemic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association Journal→Same topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout→French-language works237,207→