MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207119628 · doi:10.1002/aet2.10700

Design of a point‐of‐care ultrasound curriculum for pediatric emergency medicine fellows: A Delphi study

2021· article· en· W3207119628 on OpenAlexaff
Delia L. Gold, Marla C. Levine, Deborah Hsu, David P. Way, Allan Shefrin, Samuel H. F. Lam, Resa E. Lewiss, Jennifer R. Marín

Bibliographic record

VenueAEM Education and Training · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationDelphi methodCurriculumCore competencyMedical educationMedicineGraduate medical educationChecklistDelphiCore KnowledgePsychologyComputer scienceKnowledge managementPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: There has been a steady increase in the growth and utilization of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in pediatric emergency medicine (PEM). POCUS has been established as an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) core requirement for accreditation of PEM fellowship programs. Despite this requirement, training guidelines regarding POCUS knowledge and skills have yet to be developed. The purpose of this project was to develop a curriculum and a competency checklist for PEM fellow POCUS education. METHODS: We formed a core leadership group based on expertise in one or more key areas: PEM, POCUS, curriculum development, or Delphi methods. We recruited 29 PEM POCUS or ultrasound education experts from North America to participate in a three-round electronic Delphi project. The first Delphi round asked experts to generate a list of the core POCUS knowledge and skills that a PEM fellow would need during training to function as an autonomous practitioner. Subsequent rounds prioritized the list of knowledge and skills, and the core leadership group organized knowledge and skills into global competencies and subcompetencies. RESULTS: The first Delphi round yielded 61 POCUS areas of knowledge and skills considered important for PEM fellow learning. After two subsequent Delphi rounds, the list of POCUS knowledge and skills was narrowed to 38 items that addressed elements of six global competencies. The core leadership group then revised items into subcompetencies and categorized them under global competencies, developing a curriculum that defined the scope (depth of content) and sequence (order of teaching) of these POCUS knowledge and skill items. CONCLUSIONS: This expert, consensus-generated POCUS curriculum provides detailed guidance for PEM fellowships to incorporate POCUS education into their programs. Our curriculum also identifies core ultrasound knowledge and skills needed by PEM fellows to perform the specific POCUS applications recommended in prior publications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.431
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.322 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAEM Education and TrainingSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207