Comparison of classroom-based vs. distributive learning-based 12-lead ECG training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Providing emergency medical services (EMS) requires significant resources, including the cost of paramedic training, certification, and maintenance of competencies. Currently, no published research examines the cost and performance effectiveness of Web-based training vs. video teleconferencing-based training vs. traditional classroom-based training methods for paramedics. Hypothesis: Paramedics trained in local, remote, and Web-based groups will have similar rates of successful completion of 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) training. The Web-based training group will be the most cost-effective method of conducting 12-lead ECG training. Methods: The 12-lead ECG course was taught to all paramedics (N = 63) employed by a county EMS system in southwestern Ontario, Canada. The paramedics were placed into one of three groups: local, remote, and Web-based. The local group (n = 17) received all training in a direct-teaching classroom format. The remote group (n = 18) received training (lecture and skills) via video teleconferencing technology. The Web-based group (n = 21) received training via Web-based learning. The three groups followed the same course schedule, material, slides/presentations, and practice cases. A pilot group of paramedics (n = 7) was used to gauge material's depth and teaching times. Independent-samples t-test was used to compare the rates of completion (dependent variable) of the three groups (local, remote, and Web). Results: The local (n = 17) and remote (n = 18) groups had a 100% successful completion of the 12-lead training program. The Web-based group (n = 21) had a non-completion rate of 19% (n = 4; p = 0.042). The mean costs per student were $300 in the local group, $238 in the remote group, and $200 in the Web-based group. However, after adjusting for retraining, the mean cost per student in the Web-based group was $250. Conclusion: The cost of paramedic training, certification, and maintenance of competence requires a significant amount of resources. Each of the three methods used in this study has distinctive strengths and limitations. In this study, we identified a limitation of the Web-based training method for the introduction of a new procedure.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".