MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997022720 · doi:10.18192/uojm.v9i2.4475

Peer-Led Point-of-Care Ultrasound; A Potential Ally to Rural Medicine

2019· article· en· W2997022720 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Michel Khoury, Shankar Sethuraman, Samuel E. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisCompetence (human resources)Medical educationTUTORTrainerCurriculumCertificationMedicinePoint of care ultrasoundDescriptive statisticsPsychologyQualitative researchComputer scienceNursingPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) is increasingly used in rural settings where it’s portability,and imaging capabilities make it effective clinically. POCUS teaching has traditionally relied on faculty instruction, which is limited by the small number of certified faculty members. The UOttawa POCUS interest group deployed peer-teaching since 2018, which overcomes the instructor barrier by employing experienced medical students to train preclerkship students. This paper will evaluate the efficacy of the peer-led POCUS workshops as a learning format. Methods 3-hour POCUS workshops were held for Cardiac, MSK, Aorta, and eFAST scans from October 2018 to June 2019. Students with prior experience in POCUS were identified as peer-teachers, and were trained by an expert physician prior to the workshop. Peer-teachers taught a small group, with physician experts rotating through groups for technical support. Surveys were sent out to students who participated in the workshops assessing the following categories:utility, learning experience,workshop efficacy, tutor competence, and interest. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis was reported for the quantitative and qualitative data, respectively. Results 45 participants completed the survey. The surveys showed positive support for the aforementioned categories, with the average score being greater than 4. From the thematic analysis, the four main strengths of the peer-led format are: Trainer competence, learner comfort, situational teaching, and opportunity to practice. Conclusion Peer-led workshops are an effective format for POCUS training in instructor-constrained settings. These workshops can be translated to rural settings in lieu of a formal POCUS training program.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Ottawa Journal of MedicineSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207