Staff Perceptions of Improving Emergency Care for Children
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to identify staff perceptions of a service improvement for pediatric emergency care at a university teaching hospital. Semistructured qualitative interviews of stakeholders were conducted, and grounded theory approach was used for analysis. Forty-one interviews were conducted with physicians, nurses, managers, and health care workers. Major themes emerging from the analysis included the physical space of and flow within the pediatric emergency department (ED), impact of technology, staffing in the ED, the effects of frontline pediatricians and emergency physicians managing children in the ED, and the need for and expectations of a pediatric emergency medicine (PEM) consultant. Human interactions among health care providers, leadership, and teaching are considered as equally important as providing the appropriate environment and qualified professionals for improving care for children in the ED. Appointment of a PEM consultant was suggested to provide leadership and education to manage relationships and implement changes. Subsequent to the study, the model of care for PEM was changed, the pediatric care delivery became more integrated with the main ED, and two PEM consultants were appointed to the institution.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it