MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383814062 · doi:10.1371/journal.pgph.0002034

Compassion for midwives: The missing element in workplace culture for midwives globally

2023· article· en· W4383814062 on OpenAlexaff
Kaveri Mayra, Christine Catling, Halima Abdul Musa, Billie Hunter, Kathleen Baird

Bibliographic record

VenuePLOS Global Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassionElement (criminal law)NursingNurse-MidwivesPsychologyObstetricsMedicinePolitical sciencePregnancyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By the very nature of caring work, it could be assumed that healthcare workers show compassion and respect for those they work with and care for. However, in many workplaces, respect, empathy, compassion and supportive teamwork are lacking. For compassionate workplaces to thrive, maternity care models, policies and environments need to be examined closely for factors that enhance or hinder this important aspect of healthcare. In this commentary, we discuss the importance of compassion 'for' midwives, as an essential, non-negotiable prerequisite for compassion 'by' midwives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.536
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLOS Global Public HealthSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207