Innovating Pediatric Emergency Care and Learning Through Interprofessional Briefing and Workplace-Based Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Managing pediatric emergencies can be both clinically and educationally challenging with little existing research on how to improve resident involvement. Moreover, nursing input is frequently ignored. We report here on an innovation using interprofessional briefing (iB) and workplace-based assessment (iWBA) to improve the delivery of care, the involvement of residents, and their assessment. METHODS: Over a period of 3 months, we implement an innovation using iB and iWBA for residents providing emergency pediatric care. A constructivist thematic analysis approach was used to collect and analyze data from 4 focus groups (N = 18) with nurses (4), supervisors (5), and 2 groups of residents (4 + 5). RESULTS: Residents, supervisors, and nurses all felt that iB had positive impacts on learning, teamwork, and patient care. Moreover, when used, iB seemed to play an important role in enhancing the impact of iWBA. Although iB and iWBA seemed to be accepted and participants described important impacts on emergency department culture, conducting of both iB and iWBA could be sometimes challenging as opposed to iB alone mainly because of time constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Interprofessional briefing and iWBA are promising approaches for not only resident involvement and learning during pediatric emergencies but also enhancing team function and patient care. Nursing involvement was pivotal in the success of the innovation enhancing both care and resident learning.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".