MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193182883 · doi:10.1002/aet2.10685

Creation of a standardized pediatric emergency medicine simulation curriculum for emergency medicine residents

2021· article· en· W3193182883 on OpenAlexaff
Rebekah Burns, Manu Madhok, Ilana Bank, Michael Nguyen, Michael Falk, Muhammad Waseem, Marc Auerbach

Bibliographic record

VenueAEM Education and Training · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPediatric emergency medicineCurriculumDelphi methodMedicineMedical educationFamily medicineEmergency medicineMedical emergencyPsychologyEmergency departmentNursingEmergency physicianPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The majority of children seeking care in emergency departments are seen by general emergency medicine (EM) residency program graduates. Throughout training, EM residents manage fewer critically ill pediatric patients compared to adults, and the exposure to children with illness and injury requiring emergent assessment and management is often limited and sporadic across training sites. This report describes the creation of a robust set of simulation cases for EM trainees incorporating topics identified during a previous modified Delphi study to improve their pediatric acute care knowledge and skills. METHODS: All 30 pediatric EM topics and 19/26 procedures previously identified as "must be taught by simulation" to EM residents were mapped to 15 simulation case topics. Twenty-seven authors from 16 institutions created cases and supporting materials. Each case was iteratively implemented during a peer review process at two to five sites with EM residents. Feedback from learners and facilitators was collected via electronic surveys and used to revise each case before the next implementation. RESULTS: Thirty-five institutions participated in the peer review process. Fifty-one facilitators and 281 participants (90% EM residents) completed surveys. Most facilitators (98%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement "This simulation case is relevant to the field of emergency medicine." A majority of facilitators and participants agreed or strongly agreed with the statements "The simulation case was realistic" (98% of facilitators, 94% of participants) and "This simulation case was effective in teaching resuscitation skills" (92% of facilitators, 98% of participants). Most participants reported confidence in knowledge and skills addressed in the learning objectives after participation. CONCLUSIONS: Facilitators and EM residents found cases from a novel simulation-based curriculum covering critical pediatric EM topics relevant, realistic, and effective. This curriculum can help provide a standardized, uniform experience for EM residents who will care for critically ill pediatric patients in their communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAEM Education and TrainingSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207