159 Procedural Skills Needs for Canadian Paediatricians: A National Snapshot
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Procedural practice by paediatricians in Canada is likely evolving. The availability of non- or minimally invasive technologies, practice type, geographical variation, and the expanding scope of multiprofessional providers are examples of factors that may contribute to such changes. There is, however, limited knowledge of the procedural competencies required of general paediatricians today. An accurate understanding of the skills required is vital for planning, preparing, and allocating limited educational resources both for current and future paediatricians. The primary objective of the study was to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the procedural practice of Canadian paediatricians, with the aim of building a needs assessment for independent general paediatric practice. A one-time survey was sent to paediatricians through the Canadian Paediatric Surveillance Program (CPSP) (www.cpsp.cps.ca/surveillance). In addition to demographic information about practice type and location, participants were asked to indicate the frequency with which they performed each of 32 pre-selected procedures. The procedure list was developed in consultation with CPSP members and a variety of paediatricians. Data was combined and summarized descriptively, with valid percentages calculated where appropriate. The survey response rate was 33% (938/2,822). Of the respondents, 589 (63%) participated either partly or entirely in general paediatrics practice, and 245 (42%) had practiced for > 20 years. All provinces were represented, and practice styles ranged from urban tertiary care to remote/rural. Of the respondents who practice general paediatrics, 71% reported performing procedures. Regularly performed procedures (at least monthly) included bag-mask ventilation for infants, lumbar puncture, ear curettage, peripheral intravenous line insertion and immunization (indicated by 54%, 48%, 39%, 27%, 25% of respondents, respectively). Rarely performed procedures (yearly or less) included chest compressions, intraosseous insertion, intubation, chest tube insertion and defibrillation (80%, 65%, 57%, 53%, 52%, respectively). Procedures reported as never performed included peripheral intravenous central catheter (PICC) line insertion, central venous line (CVL) insertion, arterial line insertion, tracheostomy tube change and thoracentesis (90%, 89%, 82%, 76%, 73%, respectively). This report of real-world experiences from Canadian general paediatricians suggests a wide variability in the frequency of procedural performance. It helps to establish priorities for continuing professional educational activities and postgraduate medical education curricula in the era of competency-based medical education. Additional investigation on importance and maintenance of proficiency of these procedures would be of added value to this needs assessment, and has been undertaken by the research group.
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 | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
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 ».