MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6978049944 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6119187

Hours of work and on-call weeks preferences of Canadian midwives: relationships with intention to stay in the profession

2022· other· en· W6978049944 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Biological Studies
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDescriptive statisticsWork hoursThematic analysisAffect (linguistics)Work (physics)Test (biology)Preference

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Midwives have long workdays and work many weeks on call. There is a concern that these extended work schedules can negatively affect their intention to stay in the profession. Purpose This study provides evidence on Canadian midwives’ preferences for and experiences with policies and guidelines which limit the hours of work and weeks per year preferred to be on call, and examines the relationship between preferences and midwives’ intention to stay in the profession. Methods Data come from our 2018 pan-Canadian survey of midwives. Descriptive statistics of 720 midwives’ preferences and experiences are provided. In the correlations followed by the OLS regressions, 596 midwives’ data are used to test the associations between preferences and intention to stay in the profession. STATA (version 15) is used. A thematic analysis of 274 midwives’ responses to the open-ended survey question is conducted to give voice to midwives on what can be done for retention. Results Three quarters of the 720 respondents prefer policies and guidelines to limit hours of work in a 24-hour period, though less than half have policies and guidelines on hours of work. More than half prefer to have fewer on-call weeks or never to be on call, less than a third prefer same number of on-call weeks, and only 2% prefer more weeks to be on call. Midwives are currently working on average 33 weeks per year on call. OLS regression analysis shows that ‘met preference’ for hours of work and on-call weeks are positively associated with intention to stay. In responding to the open-ended survey question, midwives recommend limiting the consecutive hours of work and on-call weeks to manageable hours and weeks to retain them in the profession. Conclusion Midwives whose preferences are met are the ones intending to stay in the profession. There is, however, a large number of midwives with ‘unmet needs’ preferring to have policies and guidelines to limit the hours but do not have that currently, and would like to work fewer weeks on call than currently. These are the midwives who are not intending to stay in the profession.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.139 · 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
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicAgriculture and Biological StudiesFrench-language works237,207