MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769933978 · doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzx159

Healthcare providers’ perceptions of a situational awareness display for emergency department resuscitation: a simulation qualitative study

2017· article· en· W2769933978 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa A. Calder, Abhi Bhandari, George Mastoras, Kathleen Day, Kathryn Momtahan, Matthew Falconer, Brian Weitzman, Benjamin Sohmer, A. Adam Cwinn, Stanley J. Hamstra, Avi Parush

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Quality in Health Care · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSituation awarenessDebriefingFocus groupSituational ethicsHealth careNursingContext (archaeology)Patient safetyMedicinePerceptionQualitative researchPsychologyMedical emergencyMedical educationSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Emergency resuscitation of critically ill patients can challenge team communication and situational awareness. Tools facilitating team performance may enhance patient safety. OBJECTIVES: To determine resuscitation team members' perceptions of the Situational Awareness Display's utility. DESIGN: We conducted focus groups with healthcare providers during Situational Awareness Display development. After simulations assessing the display, we conducted debriefs with participants. SETTING: Dual site tertiary care level 1 trauma centre in Ottawa, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited by email physicians, nurses and respiratory therapist. INTERVENTION: Situational Awareness Display, a visual cognitive aid that provides key clinical information to enhance resuscitation team communication and situational awareness. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Themes emerging from focus groups and simulation debriefs. Three reviewers independently coded and analysed transcripts using content qualitative analysis. RESULTS: We recruited a total of 33 participants in two focus groups (n = 20) and six simulation debriefs with three 4-5 member teams (n = 13). Majority of participants (10/13) strongly endorsed the Situational Awareness Display's utility in simulation (very or extremely useful). Focus groups and debrief themes included improved perception of patient data, comprehension of context and ability to project to future decisions. Participants described potentially positive and negative impacts on patient safety and positive impacts on provider performance and team communication. Participants expressed a need for easy data entry incorporated into clinical workflow and training on how to use the display. CONCLUSION: Emergency resuscitation team participants felt the Situational Awareness Display has potential to improve provider performance, team communication and situational awareness, ultimately enhancing quality of care.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.192
GPT teacher head0.601
Teacher spread0.409 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Quality in Health CareSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207