Emergency medicine resident crisis resource management ability: a simulation-based longitudinal study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Simulation has been identified as a means of assessing resident physicians' mastery of technical skills, but there is a lack of evidence for its utility in longitudinal assessments of residents' non-technical clinical abilities. We evaluated the growth of crisis resource management (CRM) skills in the simulation setting using a validated tool, the Ottawa Crisis Resource Management Global Rating Scale (Ottawa GRS). We hypothesized that the Ottawa GRS would reflect progressive growth of CRM ability throughout residency. METHODS: Forty-five emergency medicine residents were tracked with annual simulation assessments between 2006 and 2011. We used mixed-methods repeated-measures regression analyses to evaluate elements of the Ottawa GRS by level of training to predict performance growth throughout a 3-year residency. RESULTS: Ottawa GRS scores increased over time, and the domains of leadership, problem solving, and resource utilization, in particular, were predictive of overall performance. There was a significant gain in all Ottawa GRS components between postgraduate years 1 and 2, but no significant difference in GRS performance between years 2 and 3. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, CRM skills are progressive abilities, and simulation is a useful modality for tracking their development. Modification of this tool may be needed to assess advanced learners' gains in performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it