Creation of a standardized pediatric emergency medicine simulation curriculum for emergency medicine residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".