MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414424136 · doi:10.1177/08404704251357533

Addressing burnout and fatigue in surgical services: Leveraging external partnerships and institutional support

2025· article· en· W4414424136 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Mulli

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsYukon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvertimeBurnoutGeneral partnershipCertificationAgency (philosophy)SustainabilityChecklistBaseline (sea)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Burnout and fatigue are significant challenges in healthcare, especially within our surgical services. Our remote location, frequent leadership turnover, chronic understaffing, and misalignment between operating room hours and community needs have led to excessive overtime, exhaustion, and sick leave. A sustainability plan was co-developed with stakeholders. The plan addresses human factors through department stabilization, expanded operating hours, increased baseline staffing, and training via a partnership with the Association of periOperative Registered Nurse perioperative certification program. The plan was assessed using a project analysis approach. Our objective is to demonstrate how institutional support and partnerships can reduce burnout and fatigue in surgical services. This article offers practical lessons for health leaders and other professionals seeking sustainable solutions. Six-month review showed a substantial decrease in overtime among operating room nurses and a reduction in agency nurse use. Leveraging institutional supports supported a more sustainable work-life balance and reduced burnout.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207