New insights on rural doctors’ clinical courage in the context of the unfolding COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Rural doctors typically work in low-resource settings and with limited professional support. They are sometimes pushed to the limits of their usual scope of practice to provide the medical care needed by their community. In a previous phenomenological study, we described the concept of clinical courage as underpinning rural doctors’ work in this context. In this paper, we draw on rural doctors’ experiences during the unfolding COVID pandemic to re-examine our understanding of the attributes of clinical courage. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with rural doctors from 11 countries who had experience preparing for or managing patients with COVID-19. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using NVivo. A deductive thematic analysis was undertaken to identify common ideas and responses related to the features of clinical courage. Results: Thirteen interviews from rural doctors during the unfolding COVID-19 pandemic affirmed and enriched our understanding of the attributes of clinical courage, particularly the leadership role rural doctors can have within their communities. Conclusion: This study extended our understanding that rural doctors’ experience of clinical courage is consistent amongst participants in many parts of the world, including developing countries. Introduction: Les médecins ruraux travaillent généralement dans des environnements à faibles ressources et avec un soutien professionnel limité. Ils sont parfois poussés aux limites de leur champ d’action habituel pour fournir les soins médicaux dont leur communauté a besoin. Dans une étude phénoménologique précédente, et dans ce contexte, nous avons décrit le concept de courage clinique comme étant à la base du travail des médecins ruraux. Dans cet article, nous nous appuyons sur les expériences des médecins ruraux au cours de la pandémie de COVID pour réexaminer notre compréhension des attributs du courage clinique. Méthodes: Des entretiens semi-structurés ont été menés avec des médecins ruraux de 11 pays ayant une expérience de la préparation ou de la prise en charge de patients atteints de COVID-19. Les entretiens ont été transcrits mot à mot et codés à l’aide de NVivo. Une analyse thématique déductive a été entreprise pour identifier les idées et les réponses communes liées aux caractéristiques du courage clinique. Résultats: Treize entretiens avec des médecins ruraux, durant la pandémie de COVID-19, ont confirmé et enrichi notre compréhension des attributs du courage clinique, en particulier le rôle de leadership que les médecins ruraux peuvent jouer au sein de leurs communautés. Conclusion: Cette étude nous a permis de mieux comprendre que l’expérience des médecins ruraux en matière de courage clinique est la même pour tous les participants dans de nombreuses régions du monde, y compris dans les pays en développement.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".