MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4280518962 · doi:10.1007/s43678-022-00313-0

The impact of clinical result acquisition and interpretation on task performance during a simulated pediatric cardiac arrest: a multicentre observational study

2022· article· en· W4280518962 on OpenAlexaff
Carol Rizkalla, Dailys García-Jordá, Adam Cheng, Jonathan P. Duff, Ronald Gottesman, Matthew J. Weiss, Deanna Koot, Elaine Gilfoyle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgaryMcGill UniversityUniversité LavalStollery Children's HospitalAlberta Children's Hospital
FundersRoyal College of Surgeons in Ireland
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyTask (project management)Interpretation (philosophy)Intensive care medicineEmergency medicineMedical emergencyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: The acquisition and interpretation of clinical results during resuscitations is common; however, this can delay critical clinical tasks, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. This study aims to determine the impact of clinical result acquisition and interpretation by the team leader on critical task completion during simulated pediatric cardiac arrest before and after team training. METHODS: This is a secondary data analysis of video-recorded simulated resuscitation scenarios conducted during Teams4Kids (T4K) study (June 2011-January 2015); scenarios included cardiac arrest before and after team training. The scenario included either a scripted paper or a phone call delivery of results concurrently with a clinical transition to pulseless ventricular tachycardia. Descriptive statistics and non-parametric tests were used to compare team performance before and after training. RESULTS: Performance from 40 teams was analyzed. Although the time taken to initiate CPR and defibrillation varied depending on the type of interruption and whether the scenario was before or after team training, these findings were not significantly associated with the leader's behaviour [Kruskal-Wallis test (p > 0.05)]. An exact McNemar's test determined no statistically significant difference in the proportion of leaders involved or not in interpreting results between and after the training (exact p value = 0.096). CONCLUSIONS: Team training was successful in reducing time to perform key clinical tasks. Although team training modified the way leaders behaved toward the results, this behaviour change did not impact the time taken to start CPR or defibrillate. Further understanding the elements that influence time to critical clinical tasks provides guidance in designing future simulated educational activities, subsequently improving clinical team performance and patient outcomes.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Emergency Medicine→Same topicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare→French-language works237,207→