Evaluation of a Pediatric Mock Code Educational Training Program at a Large, Tertiary Care Pediatric Hospital
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: Management of the acutely ill children represents one of the more complex clinical skills required of pediatric physicians. Our goal was to develop and evaluate a multidisciplinary pediatric mock code training program for the pediatric residents in our institution. Methods: We performed a before and after evaluation of pediatric residents. The residents were educated by attending five mock code scenarios, followed by debriefing. Before and after the five sessions, the residents completed a self-assessment questionnaire. Results: Residents reported a significant improvement in their comfort in all aspects of managing pediatric resuscitations, with notable improvement seen in running a resuscitation requiring airway management, managing fluid resuscitation and performing endotracheal intubation. The most prominent change was demonstrated in the comfort level of the overall management of a pediatric resuscitation. Conclusion: The pediatric mock code educational training program improved residents’ self-reported knowledge and comfort level in managing pediatric emergency situations.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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