Effect of Operating Room Personnel Generation on Perceptions and Responses to Surgeon Behavior
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Little is known regarding the impact of operating room (OR) personnel generation on their perceptions to various surgeon behaviors. We aimed to characterize these relationships by evaluating their responses to 5 realistic intraoperative scenarios. Methods Operating room personnel were asked to assess surgeon OR behavior across a standardized set of 5 scenarios via an online survey. For each scenario, respondents were asked to identify the behavior as either acceptable, unacceptable but would ignore, unacceptable and would confront the surgeon, or unacceptable and would report to management. Chi-squared analyses were used to compare responses to surgeon behavior with respondent generation. Results There were 3101 respondents, of which 41% of respondents were baby boomers (n = 1280), 31% were generation (Gen) X (n = 955), and 28% were Gen Y (n = 866). Overall, when compared to Gen X or Gen Y, baby boomers were significantly more likely to find surgeon behaviors of impatience ( P < .001), being late for a case ( P < .001), swearing in the OR ( P < .001), and shouting with a bleeding patient ( P = .001) to be inappropriate and would talk to the surgeon. Alternatively, Gen Y respondents were more likely to find fault with surgeon behaviors that deviate from rules and regulations, such as forgetting a time-out ( P = .001), when compared to baby boomers and Gen X respondents. Discussion Results of our study demonstrate that OR personnel generation affects their perceptions and response to surgeon behavior. Understanding these tendencies can guide efforts to improve OR interactions among team members.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it