MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186338678 · doi:10.37296/esci.v1i1.6

JOB LIFE QUALITY AND MOTIVATION FACTORS IN HEALTHCARE

2020· article· en· W3186338678 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
İmran Aslan

Bibliographic record

VenueeScience Humanity Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Practices and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJob satisfactionFeelingPsychologyQuality (philosophy)Health careGovernment (linguistics)Quarter (Canadian coin)Work (physics)Descriptive researchJob attitudeApplied psychologySocial psychologyJob performanceEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To have a high motivation and better life standards, work life is an important factor It is expected that not just monetary benefits increase the motivation but physiological factor like approval and feeling of helping others. The purpose of this study is determining preferences of job life quality and motivation of workers in healthcare. To determine the Job Quality of Life and motivating factor affecting satisfaction, 109 questionnaires about 10% of staffs (900 staffs) were applied to the Bingöl city main government hospital at third quarter of 2016. Descriptive statistics are used to analyze questionnaires. Materialistic prizes such as permission and wage increase are seen the most effective rewarding methods. Moreover, they do not want to have a good communication with management and they are not eager to take more responsibilities and authority.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.440
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.088 · 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 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScience Humanity JournalSame topicMedical Practices and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207