MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Building a Simulation‐based Crisis Resource Management Course for Emergency Medicine, Phase 1: Results from an Interdisciplinary Needs Assessment Survey

2008· article· en· W1980588864 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Emergency Medicine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoTransport CanadaSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrew resource managementMedicineTeamworkThematic analysisPatient safetySituation awarenessEmergency departmentLikert scaleNursingSituational ethicsMedical educationHealth careMedical emergencyQualitative researchPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Emergency department (ED) resuscitation requires the coordinated efforts of an interdisciplinary team. Human errors are common and have a negative impact on patient safety. Although crisis resource management (CRM) skills are utilized in other clinical domains, most emergency medicine (EM) caregivers currently receive no formal CRM training. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to compile and compare attitudes toward CRM training among EM staff physicians, nurses, and residents at two Canadian academic teaching hospitals. METHODS: Emergency physicians (EPs), residents, and nurses were asked to complete a Web survey that included Likert scales and short answer questions. Focus groups and pilot testing were used to inform survey development. Thematic content analysis was performed on the qualitative data set and compared to quantitative results. RESULTS: The response rate was 75.7% (N = 84). There was strong consensus regarding the importance of core CRM principles (i.e., effective communication, team leadership, resource utilization, problem-solving, situational awareness) in ED resuscitation. Problems with coordinating team actions (58.8%), communication (69.6%), and establishing priorities (41.3%) were among factors implicated in adverse events. Interdisciplinary collaboration (95.1%), efficiency of patient care (83.9%), and decreased medical error (82.6%) were proposed benefits of CRM training. Communication between disciplines is a barrier to effective ED resuscitation for 94.4% of nurses and 59.7% of EPs (p = 0.008). Residents reported a lack of exposure to (64.3%), yet had interest in (96.4%) formal CRM education using human patient simulation. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses rate communication as a barrier to teamwork more frequently than physicians. EM residents are keen to learn CRM skills. An opportunity exists to create a novel interdisciplinary CRM curriculum to improve EM team performance and mitigate human error.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.528
Teacher spread0.365 · 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