Educational Perspectives: Telesimulation in Neonatal Resuscitation
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
Health care professionals practicing in rural and critical access hospitals face a great diversity of clinical problems but often only have access to limited support. Geographic boundaries can construct barriers to continuing professional development. In addition, neonatal emergencies may arise infrequently at any given location. Thus, to improve neonatal resuscitation outcomes, particularly at remote and rural sites, it is likely necessary to increase the frequency with which physicians and staff are provided with hands-on simulation and team training to minimize decay. The presence of an instructor who is able to structure simulation experiences to facilitate deliberate practice, targeted assessment, feedback, and reflection may be a critical component of effective simulation, but these expert instructors typically reside in larger centers. Telesimulation, with video linkage to an expert consultant in the field, provides an opportunity for health care professionals in rural or critical access hospitals to support their own continuing education simulation curriculum.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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