Lumbar Puncture Teaching Skills Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) Station
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Neurology residents perform lumbar punctures (LPs) at least weekly on the inpatient services and regularly teach LP to rotating residents and medical students. To ensure there is explicit teaching and assessment of residency skills amidst reduced work hours, LP simulators are increasingly being utilized by residency programs. This station is part of a seven-station OSCE delivered to adult and pediatric neurology residents, but could be a stand-alone assessment. Methods The OSCE station uses a LP simulator and a standardized medical student. Resident OSCE station instructions, examiner questions and marking sheet, standardized medical student instructions, and instructor's guide are included. Formative feedback is given to examinees immediately by the examiner and standardized medical student and summative feedback is given to the residency programs. Results Residents provided immediate informal feedback of the station to the examiners during debriefing. Resident response was uniformly favorable, with many residents reporting it was fun and realistic. There were 25 senior neurology residents examined (PGY-3 to 5) from 3 universities. Using a pass threshold of 70%, 80% of residents passed the station. Resident scores ranged from 58% to 94% with a mean of 78% (SD 10%). Discussion LP and teaching skills are part of the national objectives of training for neurology in Canada, but direct supervision of resident's ability to teach LP during a clinical rotation is not always attainable, especially at night. The LP checklist was based current evidence and the teaching structure was based on a 1-minute preceptor. The LP Teaching Skills OSCE station has been used successfully assess pediatric and adult neurology resident knowledge of LP and the ability to teach the procedure to a medical student.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".