MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2621135999 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2017.138

P.053 Development of an EEG curriculum for icu nurses to facilitate real time screening of continuous EEG data for seizures in critically ill adults

2017· article· en· W2621135999 on OpenAlexaffvenue
JA Kromm, Jason E. Waechter, Andrew A. Kramer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumElectroencephalographyCritically illMedicineIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyMedical educationPsychologyPsychiatryPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Nonconvulsive seizures (NCSz) occur commonly in critically ill patients and are harmful. Diagnosis requires detection with continuous electroencephalography (cEEG) that necessitates frequent interpretation by experts. This is often not possible, and requires large amounts of resources. Screening level interpretation of cEEG by ICU nurses to facilitate timely expert diagnosis may be one solution. Methods: Kern’s approach to curriculum development was utilized to inform creation of a cEEG curriculum for ICU nurses. Results: A needs assessment revealed 80%, 94%, and 100% of nurses lacked comfort in basic seizure/EEG principles, EEG and CDSA interpretation respectively. The most requested method of learning (76%) involved simulation. A spiral curriculum of 15 interactive online tutorials with corresponding practice/simulation modules providing instant feedback was developed. To evaluate curriculum impact, time spent on modules, improvement in nursing knowledge, and diagnostic accuracy will be evaluated using pre and post curriculum tests. Participant satisfaction will be evaluated using electronic surveys. Conclusions: Development of a curriculum to teach ICU nurses basic screening diagnostic skills for NCSz is possible. Moving forward, we hope to refine and validate this learning tool and formally implement its use to help screen for NCSz prior to expert interpretation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicEpilepsy research and treatment→French-language works237,207→