Complication Is Inevitable, but Suffering is Optional—Psychological Aspects of Dealing with Complications in Surgery
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
Surgical complications remain common in health care and constitute a significant challenge for hospitals, surgeons, and patients. While they cause significant physical, financial, and psychological harm to patients and their families, they also heavily burden the involved physicians. This phenomenon, known as the "second victim," results in negative short and long-term physical, cognitive, and psychological consequences on the surgeon. In this review, we explored the intricate connections between the surgeons' emotional response to adverse events concerning the patient outcome, perceived peer reaction, and existing social and institutional support systems. Using a selective literature review coupled with personal experiences, we propose a model of this complex interaction and suggest specific interventions to ameliorate the severity of response within this framework. The institution of the proposed interventions may improve the psychological well-being of surgeons facing complications and promote a cultural shift to better support physicians when they occur.
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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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