Retenção das Habilidades de Ressuscitação Cardiopulmonar nos Estudantes de Medicina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reduction of mortality and sequelae of cardiac arrest depends on an effective and fast intervention, started as soon as possible. Basic life support involves a series of steps that may be initiated out of the hospital setting and taught to any person in specific courses. However, it is important that the rescuers retain the knowledge and skills to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), as one never knows when they will be required. Studies have shown that a loss of skills occurs as early as 30 days after the training course, with variations according to personal and professional characteristics. OBJECTIVES: to assess whether medical students are able to retain skills acquired in a BLS course for more than six months. METHODS: Prospective, case-control, observational study. Medical students attended a 40-hour course on sudden death and cardiac arrest. Skills acquired during the course were evaluated immediately after and six months after the course. Students' individual scores were compared between these time points, the percentage of correct answers was evaluated, and overall performance was rated as excellent, good, and poor. Observers and evaluation criteria were the same immediately after the course and six months later. Data were analyzed using the paired t-test and the McNemar test. The 95% confidence interval was established, and a p < 0.05 was set as statistically significant. RESULTS: Fifty students (27 female) in the first year of medical school aged from 18 to 24 years (mean of 21 years) attended the course. The number of steps successfully completed by the students at six months was significantly lower than immediately after the course (10.8 vs 12.5 p < 0.001). Neither sex nor age affected the results. Overall performance of 78% of the students was considered excellent immediately after the course, and this percentage was significantly higher than six months later (p < 0.01). After six months, the steps that the students failed to complete at six months were those related to practical skills (such as a correct hand positioning). CONCLUSION: A significant loss of skills was detected six months after the BLS course among medical students, compromising their overall performance.
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 | 0.005 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".