MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947273937 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz066.016

17 Top Curricular Priorities for Pediatric Residents in the Care of Children with Medical Complexity: A National Delphi Study

2019· article· en· W2947273937 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathleen Huth, Lori R. Newman, Laurie Glader

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelphi methodMedicineService (business)Medical educationMedical schoolDelphiLibrary scienceFamily medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous studies of pediatric residents have identified educational gaps and lack of comfort caring for children with medical complexity (CMC). There is variable clinical exposure and training opportunity in complex care across residency programs. Defining core curricular topics in complex care is a priority in medical education. The purpose of this study is to identify essential topics to be included in a standard complex care curriculum for pediatric residents. An initial topic list was generated through literature review and proceedings of national complex care special interest group meetings. Expert panelists were identified based on experience in complex care and residency education. Using the Delphi method to determine group consensus, an electronic survey was developed asking expert panelists to identify 10–15 curricular topics as essential for pediatric residents. Consensus was defined as >70% identifying a topic as essential. There was a predefined maximum of three rounds with an iterative approach and feedback provided to participants between each round. Sixteen experts were approached and agreed to participate. Response rate was 100% for all three rounds. Experts were from Canada (56%) and the United States (44%), most were affiliated with an academic center (96%) and practiced in both inpatient and outpatient settings (69%). Topics identified as essential in the first round were feeding difficulties, pain and irritability, transition, feeding tube management, difficult discussions, and team management/care coordination. Topics identified by 50–70% of participants as being essential were included in the second round, with revisions based on participant comments. Topics identified as essential in the second round were dysmotility, aspiration and safety/emergency planning. Topics that did not meet consensus were included in a third and final round with additional revisions. Two additional topics were identified as essential in the third round: neuromuscular and skeletal issues and advocacy. Essential topics were organized using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Eleven curricular priorities in the care of CMC were identified across multiple domains of the ICF framework. These topics can be used as a guide for curriculum development for pediatric residents. The Delphi method can be replicated to establish educational priorities for other health professions who care for CMC.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207