MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115369684 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001798

Assessing the knowledge of sudden unexpected death in the young among Canadian medical students and recent graduates: a cross-sectional study

2012· article· en· W2115369684 on OpenAlexaffabout
Felicity Huisma, James E. Potts, Karen Gibbs, Shubhayan Sanatani

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Effects of Exercise
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypertrophic cardiomyopathyBrugada syndromeFamily medicineCatecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardiaPediatricsCross-sectional studyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine the level of knowledge concerning Sudden Unexpected Death in the Young (SUDY) among Canadian medical students and recent graduates (≤5 years after graduating). DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted by distributing a standardised, multiple choice, online questionnaire which assessed basic knowledge of SUDY. SETTING: Canadian medical schools and residency training programmes. PARTICIPANTS: 614 Canadian medical students (in either their penultimate or final year) and recent graduates (≤5 years after graduating) completed an anonymous online questionnaire. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The level of knowledge regarding molecular aetiology, clinical presentation, pharmacological management and modes of inheritance of six of the commonest conditions causing SUDY, including hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM), arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC), Brugada syndrome, catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (CPVT), long QT syndrome (LQT) and Wolff-Parkinson White syndrome (WPW), were compared between medical students and recent graduates. Questions were broken down into basic knowledge and advanced categories and analysed as a secondary outcome measure. RESULTS: Of 614 responses, approximately two-thirds were answered by recent graduates, who generally scored 10% higher on all subject categories than medical students. Overall, questions regarding HCM were best answered (40%), followed by WPW syndrome (32%), CPVT (30%), ARVC (23%), Brugada syndrome (21%) and LQT syndrome (17%). Questions categorised as basic knowledge were answered 30% and 39% correctly in medical student and recent graduate groups, respectively, and those in the advanced category were answered 20% and 25% correctly. CONCLUSIONS: Survey respondents fared poorly when answering questions regarding SUDY, which may be a reflection of inadequate medical education regarding these disorders. Standardised teaching regarding SUDY needs to occupy a stronger focus in Canadian medical curricula in order to prevent more unnecessary deaths by these syndromes in the future.

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 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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicCardiovascular Effects of ExerciseFrench-language works237,207