A Qualitative Exploration of the Impact of a Distressed Family Member on Pediatric Resuscitation Teams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family presence during resuscitation (FPDR) is commonplace in many hospitals today. Research has supported the positive effects it can have on family members; however, there is little research about how it may affect the resuscitation team's performance, especially in a pediatric population. Our objective was to identify how resuscitation team members perceive and respond to the presence of a distressed family member during a resuscitation. METHODS: This is a qualitative study in which we examine FPDR-related themes raised by pediatric resuscitation team members after a resuscitation simulation. As part of a team training educational intervention, pediatric resuscitation teams, composed of nurses, respiratory therapists, and resident physicians, participated in a video-recorded simulated event in which they attempted to resuscitate an infant. During the scenario, a confederate actor played the role of a distressed "parent." Video-recorded debriefs occurred immediately after each simulation. Video recordings were transcribed verbatim, and then transcripts were coded and analyzed via thematic analysis to saturation. RESULTS: Thirteen postevent video debriefs were analyzed. A total of 74 participants took part in these simulations and debriefs. Analysis revealed 15 major and 29 minor themes, which were mapped to 5 factors, namely resuscitation environment, affective responses, cognitive responses, behavioral responses, and team dynamics. CONCLUSIONS: FPDR has an impact on resuscitation team members' responses and influences their adaptive behavior. If not managed well, this may pose potential patient safety concerns. Policy and training of specific teamwork skills are ways in which we can better equip health care providers to effectively manage FPDR.
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 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".