GROWTH MINDSET MODERATES THE IMPACT OF NEONATAL RESUSCITATION SKILL MAINTENANCE ON PERFORMANCE IN A SIMULATION TRAINING VIDEO GAME
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract BACKGROUND The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (2004) reporting on preventing infant death and injury during delivery identified human errors during neonatal resuscitation as responsible for more than two thirds of perinatal mortality and morbidity. One of the main causes of human error in neonatal resuscitation stems from a lack of practical learning experiences highlighted by the neonatal training paradox of high-acuity, low-occurrence (HALO) situations that arise infrequently. simulation-based medical education (SBME) is resource and cost intensive, and not offered frequently enough for development of competency and for supporting knowledge retention. Therefore, other methods of training to improve knowledge retention and decision-making are needed. We therefore developed a complementary tool to the physical SBME to improve knowledge retention during neonatal resuscitation in the delivery room. Specifically, we developed a game-based neonatal resuscitation training simulator called RETAIN. OBJECTIVES We hypothesized that HCP playing the video game will have an improved mindset and therefore an improved neonatal resuscitation performance. DESIGN/METHODS HCPs trained in NRP, including registered nurses, respiratory therapists, neonatal nurse practitioners, neonatal consultants, and neonatal fellows were recruited from the Royal Alexandra Hospital, a tertiary NICU. Each participant was asked to complete a pre-game questionnaire to obtain demographics (e.g. last Neonatal Resuscitation Course (NRP)-course, years of experience) and assess their neonatal resuscitation knowledge by completing a Resuscitation scenario. Afterwards each participant played the RETAIN simulator, which started with a tutorial before the actual three rounds and there was a countdown for each of the rounds to simulate the stress of a real-world scenario. After completion of the game each participant also completed a Post-game questionnaire to assess the player’s mindset (e.g. How much do you agree with the following statements? You can always change how good you are at your job or You can get better at your job with practice) using a Likert scale (1=Strongly Disagree to 5=Strongly agree). RESULTS We recruited 50 (45 females, 4 males, and 1 not reported) HCP who were all NRP-trained and had completed a NRP refresher course within the last 24 months. Participants needed a mean (SD) 8.47 (8.66) minutes to complete the game. On average, participants reported high levels of growth mindset (with scores ranging from seven to ten), took their latest NRP course more than eight months prior to the current study, and scored 93% in the game (32 was a perfect score). Interestingly, participants who took the NRP course more recently made more mistakes in the simulation game. There was a significant interaction of Last NRP Course and Growth Mindset in predicting Number of Tries (b =.09, S.E.=.04, beta=.32, t=2.25, p=.03), as well as a main effect for Last NRP Course (b= -.08, S.E.=.04, beta=-.30, t=-2.04, p<.05). Thus, participants who took an NRP course recently (i.e., within eight months), before the current study, completed the game in significantly fewer tries when they endorsed more rather than less of a growth mindset. However, participants who endorsed more of a growth mindset performed similarly on the game regardless of when they took the NRP course. CONCLUSION The study examined the relation between HCP task performance and time elapsed since their latest NRP course and found that growth mindset moderates this relation. Specifically, HCP who took the NRP course within the past eight months, those who endorsed a higher growth mindset made fewer mistakes in a simulation game. Some implications include growth mindset interventions and increased opportunities to practice skills in simulation sessions to help HCP achieve better performance after taking a refresher NRP course.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».