MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3186712199 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-047208

PediAppRREST: effectiveness of an interactive cognitive support tablet app in reducing deviations from guidelines in the management of paediatric cardiac arrest: protocol for a simulation-based randomised controlled trial

2021· article· en· W3186712199 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Corazza, Marta Arpone, Deborah Snijders, Adam Cheng, Valentina Stritoni, Pier Luigi Ingrassia, Marco De Luca, Luca Tortorolo, Anna Chiara Frigo, Liviana Da Dalt, Silvia Bressan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversità degli Studi di Padova
KeywordsMedicineChecklistGuidelineProtocol (science)Randomized controlled trialUsabilityConsolidated Standards of Reporting TrialsPhysical therapyMedical emergencyAlternative medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Paediatric cardiac arrest (PCA), despite its low incidence, has a high mortality. Its management is complex and deviations from guideline recommendations occur frequently. We developed a new interactive tablet app, named PediAppRREST, to support the management of PCA. The app received a good usability evaluation in a previous pilot trial. The aim of the study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the PediAppRREST app in reducing deviations from guideline recommendations in PCA management. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, simulation-based, randomised controlled, three-parallel-arm study. Participants are residents in Paediatric, Emergency Medicine, and Anaesthesiology programmes in Italy. All 105 teams (315 participants) manage the same scenario of in-hospital PCA. Teams are randomised by the study statistician into one of three study arms for the management of the PCA scenario: (1) an intervention group using the PediAppRREST app or (2) a control group Paediatric Advanced Life Support (CtrlPALS+) using the PALS pocket reference card; or (3) a control group (CtrlPALS-) not allowed to use any PALS-related cognitive aid. The primary outcome of the study is the number of deviations (delays and errors) in PCA management from PALS guideline recommendations, according to a novel checklist, named c-DEV15plus. The c-DEV15plus scores will be compared between groups with a one-way analysis of variance model, followed by the Tukey-Kramer multiple comparisons adjustment procedure in case of statistical significance. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Ethics Committee of the University Hospital of Padova, coordinating centre of the trial, deemed the project to be a negligible risk study and approved it through an expedited review process. The results of the study will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, and at national and international scientific conferences. Based on the study results, the PediAppRREST app will be further refined and will be available for download by institutions/healthcare professionals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04619498; Pre-results.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.006

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.394 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Open→Same topicCardiac Arrest and Resuscitation→French-language works237,207→