MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295750092 · doi:10.24124/2022/59306

Point-of-care ultrasound education needs for nurse practitioners in primary care settings: An integrative review

2022· dissertation· en· W4295750092 on OpenAlexaff
Allan Lai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers UniversityUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint of carePoint of care ultrasoundMedicineSAFERNursingMedical diagnosisResource (disambiguation)Health careMedical educationComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) is the process of operating a compact ultrasound machine at a patient’s location and immediately integrating the images generated into patient care. POCUS can help nurse practitioners (NPs) make more accurate diagnoses, facilitate safer procedures, and bridge health care access gaps in resource-limited settings such as primary care; however, it is widely agreed that POCUS is operator-dependent and that appropriate education is required to competently operate the device. This integrative review sought to determine what education NPs need to competently operate POCUS in primary care and it was found that there is no data specific to NPs; much of the available information is instead within the medical literature. Given the numerous benefits of POCUS for improving patient care and health care systems efficiency, NPs must urgently determine their POCUS education needs as they have ethical and legal obligations, in addition to a professional responsibility to ensure safe, high-quality patient care.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.375 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207