COVID-19 has heightened tensions between and exposed threats to core values of emergency medicine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Professional culture is a powerful influence in emergency departments, but incompletely understood. Disasters magnify cultural realities, and as such the COVID-19 pandemic offered a unique opportunity to better understand emergency medicine (EM) values, practices, and beliefs. METHODS: We conducted a collaborative ethnography at a tertiary care center during the acute phase of the response to the threat of COVID-19 (March-May 2020). Collaborative ethnography is a method that partners directly with communities during design, data gathering, and analysis to study culture. An ED-based research team gathered data including field notes from 300 h of participant observation and informal interviews, 42 semi-structured interviews, and 57 departmental documents. Data were deductively coded using a previously generated framework for understanding EM culture. RESULTS: Each of seven core values from the original framework were identified in the dataset and further contextualized understanding of EM culture. COVID-19 exacerbated pre-existing tensions and threats to the core values of EM. For example, the desire to provide patient-centered care was impeded by strict visitor restrictions; the ability to treat life-threatening illness was impaired by new resuscitation room layouts and infection control procedures; and subtle changes in protocols had downstream impact on flow and the ability to balance needs and resources at a system level. The cultural values related to teams were protective and strengthened during this time. The pandemic exposed problems with the status quo, underscored inherent tensions between ED values, and highlighted threats to self-identity. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 has highlighted and compounded existing tensions and threats to the core values of EM, underscoring a critical mismatch between values and practice. Realignment of the realities of ED work with staff values is urgently needed.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.058 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".