MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037262920 · doi:10.1017/cem.2020.432

Mental practice as a novel learning strategy for donning and doffing personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020· article· en· W3037262920 on OpenAlexaff
Jamie Riggs, Melissa McGowan, Andrew Petrosoniak, Christopher Hicks

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonal protective equipmentDistancingPandemicMental healthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Medical educationSocial distancePsychologyMedicinePsychiatryInfectious disease (medical specialty)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic presents challenges to the effective use of personal protective equipment, including equipment shortages, staff unfamiliarity, and physical distancing. Mental practice has been used as an alternative learning strategy in medicine for the development of technical skills. We developed educational materials with the aim of using mental practice to overcome these challenges and increase provider skill and confidence with the use of personal protective equipment. A mental practice script integrating cognitive, kinesthetic, and visual cues with a list of procedural steps was created and iteratively refined. To allow the use of this tool by providers unfamiliar with the principles of mental practice, accompanying explanatory materials were created and disseminated widely through the Free Open Access Medical education (FOAMed) community. By creating easily accessible resources to facilitate effective mental practice, providers may be able to increase their skill and comfort with the procedure while conserving personal protective equipment and respecting physical distancing guidelines.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Emergency MedicineSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207