Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis: A High Fidelity Interprofessional Simulation Scenario to Foster Teamwork Among Senior Nursing, Medicine, and Pharmacy Undergraduate Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nursing, medicine, and pharmacy students have limited opportunities during their undergraduate programs to learn and practice together as an interprofessional team. This has prompted faculty at Memorial University of Newfoundland to explore the use of high fidelity simulated interprofessional education (HF-IPE) to help nursing, medicine, and pharmacy students learn about their roles, develop communication and collaboration skills, and foster teamwork. Research has shown that high fidelity simulated education can promote critical thinking, engage learners, improve confidence, and enhance psychomotor skills; however, there is limited data on the impact of HF-IPE on fostering teamwork. This technical report describes one HF-IPE scenario designed to foster teamwork among senior undergraduate nursing, medicine, and pharmacy students. The scenario is designed to promote an understanding of the roles of nursing, medical, and pharmaceutical professionals in an interprofessional team during the emergency management of an adult patient experiencing acute anaphylaxis. Teamwork and communication skills are emphasized, and students are provided with the opportunity to communicate and collaborate within an interprofessional healthcare team.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".