Impact of stress on resident performance in simulated trauma scenarios
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: Training and practice in medicine are inherently stressful. The effects of stress on performance in clinical situations are poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to examine the stress responses and clinical performance of residents during low and high stress (HS) simulated trauma resuscitations. METHODS: Thirteen emergency medicine and general surgery residents were evaluated in HS and low stress (LS) trauma resuscitation simulations. Subjective and physiologic (heart rate, salivary cortisol) responses were measured at baseline and in response to the scenarios. Performance was assessed with global rating and checklist scores of technical performance, time to record critical information, and the Anesthesia Non-Technical Skills tool. Post-scenario recall was assessed with the completion of a standardized trauma history form. RESULTS: Post-scenario subjective stress and cortisol levels were higher in the HS scenario compared with the LS scenario (p < 0.05). Checklist performance scores and post-scenario recall were significantly lower in the HS compared with the LS condition (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In trainees, some aspects of performance and immediate recall appear to be impaired in complex clinical scenarios in which they exhibit elevated subjective and physiologic stress responses. The findings of this study highlight a potential threat to patient safety and demand further investigation. Future studies should strive to further elucidate the effects of stress on specific components of performance and investigate ways to reduce its negative impact.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it