17 Top Curricular Priorities for Pediatric Residents in the Care of Children with Medical Complexity: A National Delphi Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Previous studies of pediatric residents have identified educational gaps and lack of comfort caring for children with medical complexity (CMC). There is variable clinical exposure and training opportunity in complex care across residency programs. Defining core curricular topics in complex care is a priority in medical education. The purpose of this study is to identify essential topics to be included in a standard complex care curriculum for pediatric residents. An initial topic list was generated through literature review and proceedings of national complex care special interest group meetings. Expert panelists were identified based on experience in complex care and residency education. Using the Delphi method to determine group consensus, an electronic survey was developed asking expert panelists to identify 10–15 curricular topics as essential for pediatric residents. Consensus was defined as >70% identifying a topic as essential. There was a predefined maximum of three rounds with an iterative approach and feedback provided to participants between each round. Sixteen experts were approached and agreed to participate. Response rate was 100% for all three rounds. Experts were from Canada (56%) and the United States (44%), most were affiliated with an academic center (96%) and practiced in both inpatient and outpatient settings (69%). Topics identified as essential in the first round were feeding difficulties, pain and irritability, transition, feeding tube management, difficult discussions, and team management/care coordination. Topics identified by 50–70% of participants as being essential were included in the second round, with revisions based on participant comments. Topics identified as essential in the second round were dysmotility, aspiration and safety/emergency planning. Topics that did not meet consensus were included in a third and final round with additional revisions. Two additional topics were identified as essential in the third round: neuromuscular and skeletal issues and advocacy. Essential topics were organized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Eleven curricular priorities in the care of CMC were identified across multiple domains of the ICF framework. These topics can be used as a guide for curriculum development for pediatric residents. The Delphi method can be replicated to establish educational priorities for other health professions who care for CMC.
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 | 0,028 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 ».