Workload of Team Leaders and Team Members During a Simulated Sepsis Scenario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Crisis resource management principles dictate appropriate distribution of mental and/or physical workload so as not to overwhelm any one team member. Workload during pediatric emergencies is not well studied. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index is a multidimensional tool designed to assess workload validated in multiple settings. Low workload is defined as less than 40, moderate 40-60, and greater than 60 signify high workloads. Our hypothesis is that workload among both team leaders and team members is moderate to high during a simulated pediatric sepsis scenario and that team leaders would have a higher workload than team members. DESIGN: Multicenter observational study. SETTING: Nine pediatric simulation centers (five United States, three Canada, and one United Kingdom). PATIENTS: Team leaders and team members during a 12-minute pediatric sepsis scenario. INTERVENTIONS: National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred twenty-seven teams were recruited from nine sites. One hundred twenty-seven team leaders and 253 team members completed the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index. Team leader had significantly higher overall workload than team member (51 ± 11 vs 44 ± 13; p < 0.01). Team leader had higher workloads in all subcategories except in performance where the values were equal and in physical demand where team members were higher than team leaders (29 ± 22 vs 18 ± 16; p < 0.01). The highest category for each group was mental 73 ± 13 for team leader and 60 ± 20 for team member. For team leader, two categories, mental (73 ± 17) and effort (66 ± 16), were high workload, most domains for team member were moderate workload levels. CONCLUSIONS: Team leader and team member are under moderate workloads during a pediatric sepsis scenario with team leader under high workloads (> 60) in the mental demand and effort subscales. Team leader average significantly higher workloads. Consideration of decreasing team leader responsibilities may improve team workload distribution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".