Cognitive Aids With Roles Defined (CARD) for Obstetrical Crises: A Multisite Before-and-after Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth. 2020;67:970–980) During critical events, an interprofessional team’s coordinated response directly affects patient outcomes. Improvement for such responses may occur through the use of cognitive aids, which can lessen the dependence on memory for healthcare providers in critical situations. A new type of cognitive aid, cognitive aids with roles defined (CARD), allows for clarification of crisis roles using a system of cards assigned to particular team members in order to remind the wearers of their assigned tasks. In the event of a crisis, those without cards are asked to remain in the room away from the patient while waiting for instructions from a Code Leader. The purpose of this study was an evaluation of the CARD system for emergency cesarean deliveries. The primary hypothesis of the study was the CARD system would reduce delivery time. In addition, they hypothesized the CARD system would improve overall clinical outcomes for mother and baby (as compared to traditional emergency cesarean management without CARD).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".