MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922385722 · doi:10.3166/afmu-2019-0144

Apprentissage par simulation en pédiatrie : l’exemple de l’arrêt cardiorespiratoire de l’enfant

2019· article· fr· W2922385722 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Drummond

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales françaises de médecine d’urgence · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArtPolitical sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La simulation en santé s’est diffusée très rapidement en pédiatrie à partir des années 2000 aux États-Unis et au Canada, puis à partir des années 2010 en France. L’arrêt cardiorespiratoire (ACR) de l’enfant représente le meilleur exemple des bénéfices qui peuvent être apportés par la simulation. La simulation peut reproduire à l’infini cette situation exceptionnelle, offre un apprentissage sans risque pour le patient ni pour l’apprenant, permet de travailler ses aspects cognitifs, techniques et humains. La simulation est effectivement associée à un gain en connaissance et en compétence chez les apprenants et participe à l’amélioration du pronostic des patients. Afin de maximiser l’efficacité pédagogique de l’enseignement de la prise en charge de l’ACR de l’enfant, les responsables pédagogiques devraient sans cesse évaluer leurs programmes, privilégier des curriculums qui associent la simulation avec d’autres modalités d’apprentissage et avoir pour objectif une pédagogie de la maîtrise. Les mannequins haute fidélité, s’ils sont appréciés par les apprenants, restent pédagogiquement équivalents aux mannequins basse fidélité pour l’apprentissage de la prise en charge de l’ACR de l’enfant.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales françaises de médecine d’urgenceSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207