MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

JS-MT-5: MAINTAINING AN ACTIVE RESEARCH CAREER DURING PARENTHOOD: AN EXPERIENCED PARENT PERSPECTIVE

2023· article· en· W4315707328 on OpenAlexaff
Nadia Khan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)MedicineProductivityWork (physics)Career developmentMedical educationWork productivityPublic relationsEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Almost 80% of faculty in sciences and medicine are parents. This poses a challenge for early and mid-career faculty when trying to establish independent research and continue productivity as a researcher. In this discussion, we outline the challenges faced by faculty, the “parent penalty”, work to life and life to work conflict, and the differential effect of parenting by gender on maintaining an active research career. Through a long view lens of personal experiences, I will discuss potential strategies to try to maintain an active research career during parenthood in academia.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.543
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.015 · 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.

Study designQualitative
DomainIncentives
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207