MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318111862 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0152882

Correlates of Performance of Healthcare Workers in Emergency, Triage, Assessment and Treatment plus Admission Care (ETAT+) Course in Rwanda: Context Matters

2016· article· en· W2318111862 on OpenAlexafffund
Celestin Hategekimana, Jeannie Shoveller, Lisine Tuyisenge, Cynthia Kenyon, David F. Cechetto, Larry D. Lynd

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsProvidence Health CareLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern UniversityCentre for Advancing Health OutcomesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersForeign Affairs and International Trade CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaBelgisch Ontwikkelingsagentschap
KeywordsTriageOdds ratioMedicineContext (archaeology)OddsConfidence intervalHealth careLogistic regressionTest (biology)Emergency medicineFamily medicineNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Emergency, Triage, Assessment and Treatment plus Admission care (ETAT+) course, a comprehensive advanced pediatric life support course, was introduced in Rwanda in 2010 to facilitate the achievement of the fourth Millennium Development Goal. The impact of the course on improving healthcare workers (HCWs) knowledge and practical skills related to providing emergency care to severely ill newborns and children in Rwanda has not been studied. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of the ETAT+ course on HCWs knowledge and practical skills, and to identify factors associated with greater improvement in knowledge and skills. METHODS: We used a one group, pre-post test study using data collected during ETAT+ course implementation from 2010 to 2013. The paired t-test was used to assess the effect of ETAT+ course on knowledge improvement in participating HCWs. Mixed effects linear and logistic regression models were fitted to explore factors associated with HCWs performance in ETAT+ course knowledge and practical skills assessments, while accounting for clustering of HCWs in hospitals. RESULTS: 374 HCWs were included in the analysis. On average, knowledge scores improved by 22.8/100 (95% confidence interval (CI) 20.5, 25.1). In adjusted models, bilingual (French & English) participants had a greater improvement in knowledge 7.3 (95% CI 4.3, 10.2) and higher odds of passing the practical skills assessment (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 2.60; 95% CI 1.25, 5.40) than those who were solely proficient in French. Participants who attended a course outside of their health facility had higher odds of passing the skills assessment (aOR = 2.11; 95% CI 1.01, 4.44) than those who attended one within their health facility. CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows a positive impact of ETAT+ course on improving participants' knowledge and skills related to managing emergency pediatric and neonatal care conditions. The findings regarding key factors influencing ETAT+ course outcomes demonstrate the importance of considering key contextual factors (e.g., language barriers) that might affect HCWs performance in this type of continuous medical education.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations27
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207