MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224215928 · doi:10.24908/pocus.v7i1.15625

Can Medical Students Learn and Perform POCUS in the Pediatric Emergency Department? Implementation of a Short Curriculum

2022· article· en· W4224215928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael Cooper, Jodi Jones, Mandy Pascual, Steven Field, Juan Mark Rendon, Christine Kulstad, Bryant Dixon, Kristie Pham Tu, Aman Narayan, Hunter J. Pyle, Khiem Hoang, Anthony Han, Dalbir Bahga, Aman Pandey, Lynn P. Roppolo

Bibliographic record

VenuePOCUS Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeorgia Clinical and Translational Science AllianceNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
KeywordsMedicinePediatric emergency medicineEmergency departmentUltrasoundInferior vena cavaEmergency medicineRadiologyNuclear medicineEmergency physician

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To determine medical student ability to accurately obtain and interpret POCUS exams of varying difficulty in the pediatric population after a short didactic and hands-on POCUS course. Methods: Five medical students were trained in four POCUS applications (bladder volume, long bone for fracture, limited cardiac for left ventricular function, & inferior vena cava collapsibility) and enrolled pediatric ED patients. Ultrasound-fellowship-trained emergency medicine physicians reviewed each scan for image quality and interpretation accuracy using the American College of Emergency Physicians’ quality assessment scale. We report acceptable scan frequency and medical student vs. Ultrasound-fellowship-trained emergency medicine physician interpretation agreement with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Ultrasound-fellowship-trained emergency medicine physicians graded 51/53 bladder volume scans as acceptable (96.2%; 95% CI 87.3-99.0%) and agreed with 50/53 bladder volume calculations (94.3%; 95% CI 88.1-100%). Ultrasound-fellowship-trained emergency medicine physicians graded 35/37 long bone scans as acceptable (94.6%; 95% CI 82.3-98.5%) and agreed with 32/37 medical student long bone scan interpretations (86.5%; 95% CI 72.0-94.1%). Ultrasound-fellowship-trained emergency medicine physicians graded 116/120 cardiac scans as acceptable (96.7%; 95% CI 91.7-98.7%) and agreed with 111/120 medical student left ventricular function interpretations (92.5%; 95% CI 86.4-96.0%). Ultrasound-fellowship-trained emergency medicine physicians graded 99/117 inferior vena cava scans as acceptable (84.6%; 95% CI 77.0-90.0%) and agreed with 101/117 medical student interpretations of inferior vena cava collapsibility (86.3%; 95% CI 78.9-91.4%). Conclusions: Medical students demonstrated satisfactory ability within a short period of time in a range of POCUS scans on pediatric patients after a novel curriculum. This supports the incorporation of a formal POCUS education into medical school curricula and suggests that novice POCUS learners can attain a measure of competency in multiple applications after a short training course.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePOCUS JournalSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207