Impact of a Multidisciplinary Sepsis Initiative on Knowledge and Behavior in a Pediatric Center
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Our institution performed an educational initiative targeting previously identified barriers to pediatric sepsis recognition and treatment. We hypothesized that provider knowledge, attitude, and behavior would be improved 1 year after implementation. Methods: This was a prospective, observational study of a multi-faceted quality initiative introduced to providers in the Emergency Department, inpatient wards, and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit of a tertiary care children’s hospital. Educational platforms consisted of quarterly electronic sepsis “newsletters,” brightly colored posters highlighting protocol and screening strategies displayed throughout the hospital, and low-fidelity simulation sessions (drills) led by trained staff and incorporated into daily workflows. The content was driven by feedback from a baseline needs assessment of sepsis education. One year after implementation, the needs assessment was repeated. Results: Over 3 months, facilitators conducted 197 drills and captured a majority of nurses (89%), pediatrics residents (96%), and respiratory therapists (62%). By 6 months, 241 sessions had been completed. Approximately 55.4% of the 442 eligible staff participated in our post-intervention survey. Overall, knowledge of diagnostic criteria for pediatric sepsis and septic shock increased from pre-intervention levels ( P = 0.015). Among post-implementation respondents, drill participants outperformed their colleagues ( P = 0.001). A greater percentage of post-intervention respondents indicated comfort with sepsis recognition ( P < 0.001), and fewer reported hesitating to bring sepsis concerns to their care team ( P < 0.01). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that a multidisciplinary curriculum balancing active education—through brief, targeted simulation—and general awareness—through electronic resources and a poster campaign—can improve sepsis-related knowledge, attitude, and behavior among pediatric practitioners.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".