MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404259128 · doi:10.1016/j.surge.2024.11.005

“We are very family like”: How do relationships with colleagues affect career satisfaction for surgeons?

2024· article· en· W4404259128 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Surgeon · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)PsychologyJob satisfactionSocial psychologyApplied psychologyCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this research was to explore the role of surgeon relationships with their colleagues on career satisfaction. This qualitative study employed a thematic analysis based on the core elements of The Grounded Theory Method. Forty-two pediatric neurosurgeons, cardio-thoracic surgeons and ophthalmologists were recruited from 9 countries around the globe and interviewed in-depth about the role of their collegial relationships on their career satisfaction. Data was coded line-by-line to extract themes and to identify patterns across the interviews. Career satisfaction was greatly enhanced by having a cohesive and healthy team. ‘Healthy’ teams were described as those that were emotionally supportive of each other, where colleagues could be trusted to back each other up, where communication was open and transparent, and where collaboration was the departmental norm. Career satisfaction was greatly diminished when there were interpersonal conflicts and personality clashes between surgeons, where there was poor departmental leadership creating a culture of fear and insecurity, when colleagues were perceived as egotistical, in competitive departments, where there was perceived to be an unequal distribution of work, and when surgeons felt alone and unsupported. Our study found that healthy teams had very specific qualities that could be cultivated and enhanced on surgical teams by making a conscious effort to improve the workplace culture and psychological safety among the team. In the conclusions, a number of recommendations are made on how to go about achieving this goal. • Poor interpersonal relationships with colleagues decreases career satisfaction. • Healthy teams are emotionally and practically supportive, trusting, and collaborative. • Unhealthy teams are conflictual, competitive, individualistic, and ego driven. • Poor leadership impacts career satisfaction and desire to leave a department. • Healthy surgical teams can be encouraged through structural changes and interventions.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.120
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.262 · 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