Knowledge translation studies in paediatric emergency medicine: A systematic review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Systematic review of knowledge translation studies focused on paediatric emergency care to describe and assess the interventions used in emergency department settings. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for knowledge translation studies conducted in the emergency department that included the care of children. Two researchers independently reviewed the studies. RESULTS: From 1305 publications identified, 15 studies of varied design were included. Four were cluster-controlled trials, two patient-level randomised controlled trials, two interrupted time series, one descriptive study and six before and after intervention studies. Knowledge translation interventions were predominantly aimed at the treating clinician, with some targeting the organisation. Studies assessed effectiveness of interventions over 6-12 months in before and after studies, and 3-28 months in cluster or patient level controlled trials. Changes in clinical practice were variable, with studies on single disease and single treatments in a single site showing greater improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for effective methods to translate knowledge into practice in paediatric emergency medicine is fairly limited. More optimal study designs with more explicit descriptions of interventions are needed to facilitate other groups to effectively apply these procedures in their own setting.
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 | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".