MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4372335919 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0285402

Is online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic associated with increased burnout in medical learners?: A medical school’s experience

2023· article· en· W4372335919 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sarah C. Hunt, Jenna Simpson, Lyndon Letwin, Bryan MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsNOSM University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BurnoutPandemic2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Medical educationMedical schoolMedicineOnline learningPsychologyClinical psychologyComputer scienceVirologyInternal medicineWorld Wide WebOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a shift to virtual curriculum delivery at Canadian medical schools. At the NOSM University, some learners transitioned to entirely online learning, while others continued in-person, in-clinic learning. This study aimed to show that medical learners who transitioned to exclusively online learning exhibited higher levels of burnout compared to their peers who continued in-person, clinical learning. Analysis of factors that protect against burnout including resilience, mindfulness, and self-compassion exhibited by online and in-person learners at NOSM University during this curriculum shift were also explored. METHODS: As part of a pilot wellness initiative, a cross-sectional online survey-based study of learner wellness was conducted at NOSM University during the 2020-2021 academic year. Seventy-four learners responded. The survey utilized the Maslach Burnout Inventory, the Brief Resilience Scale, Cognitive and Affective Mindfulness Scale-Revised, and the Self-Compassion Scale-Short Form. T-tests were utilized to compare these parameters in those who studied exclusively online and those who continued learning in-person in a clinical setting. RESULTS: Medical learners who engaged in online learning exhibited significantly higher levels of burnout when compared with learners who continued in-person learning in a clinical setting, despite scoring equally on protective factors such as resilience, mindfulness, and self-compassion. CONCLUSION: The results discussed in this paper suggest that the increased time spent in a virtual learning environment during the COVID-19 pandemic might be associated with burnout among exclusively online learners, as compared to learners who were educated in clinical, in-person settings. Further inquiry should investigate causality and any protective factors that could mitigate negative effects of the virtual learning environment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→