A novel online education module to teach clinicians how to correctly identify ultrasonographic features of mediastinal lymph nodes during endobronchial ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Ultrasonographic features can be used to predict mediastinal lymph node malignancy during endobronchial ultrasonography. Despite the validity of using these features for this purpose, the features are not being widely used in clinical practice. This may be attributable to the absence of educational programs that teach clinicians how to identify the features. To address this knowledge gap, we developed an online educational module to teach clinicians how to correctly interpret ultrasonographic features. Methods: The module was designed using corrective feedback and test-enhanced learning theories and distributed to clinicians in relevant specialties. The efficacy of the program was determined by comparing the percentages of correctly identified ultrasonographic features as each clinician progressed through the module. Participants were also asked to self-rate their confidence during the module. Analysis of variance was conducted, and a learning curve and descriptive statistics were generated. Results: Twenty-two of the 29 participants (76%) completed the module. Analysis of variance indicated that the percentage of correctly identified features increased significantly as clinicians completed the module (p = 0.004); this finding is supported by the positive slope of the learning curve. Even though they initially reported some difficulty with identifying certain features, their confidence increased as they progressed through the module. When asked, 86% of participants reported that they found the educational module helpful and 90% reported that they would recommend it to others. Conclusion: Participating clinicians were receptive to the interactive educational module. It enhances clinician skill and confidence in interpreting ultrasonographic features. The results of this study provide the foundation needed to test the validity of the educational module in clinical settings and to further explore clinician preferences for educational programs.
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 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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".