MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396872158 · doi:10.59556/japi.71.0418

To Access Knowledge Regarding Organ Donation among Healthcare Workers and Their Willingness toward Organ Donation

2024· article· en· W4396872158 on OpenAlexaff
Kapil Zirpe, Sushma Gurav, Subhal Dixit, Prajakta Pote, Abhijeet Deshmukh, Ananda Tiwari, Prasad Suryawanshi, Surekha Joshi, Khalid Khatib, Lochana Jadhav, Manasi Gole, S. Mathew, Raeena L Shaikh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Association of Physicians of India · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Donation and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsOntario Neurotrauma Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrgan donationHealth careDonationTissue DonationBusinessMedicineInternet privacyTransplantationPolitical scienceSurgeryLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In India, critical shortage of organ donations, particularly deceased donations, has led to a dire situation in India, with thousands of patients waiting for transplants and a significant number of them succumbing. One of the reasons for the shortage of organs for transplantation is unawareness and prejudiced information about organ donation. Being direct or indirect stakeholders, the knowledge regarding organ donation among healthcare workers may play an important role in the donation process. AIM: To assess the knowledge regarding cadaver organ donation among healthcare workers and their willingness toward organ donation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: -values were considered significant at <0.05. RESULTS: < 0.01). CONCLUSION: We have observed fair awareness regarding overall cadaver organ donation concept among healthcare workers. There is a need to improve knowledge of extended age criteria and which organs can be retrieved from deceased donor. Authorities have to work hard on delivery of organ donation pledging card to promote donation program.

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)0.009
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Association of Physicians of IndiaSame topicOrgan Donation and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207