Enhanced point of care ultrasound skills after additional instruction from simulated patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Point of Care Ultrasound (POCUS) training in Canadian undergraduate medical programs is steadily increasing. To date, the simulated patients (SPs) in our program have only provided feedback on comfort and professionalism. Involving the POCUS SPs as teachers (SP-teachers) of POCUS skills provides an additional opportunity for instruction. In this pilot study, we explored the impact of SP-teachers instructing medical trainees while they learned POCUS. Outcomes of interest included the level of proficiency achieved after the session and trainee satisfaction with the learning experience. Methods: Second year medical students were randomized into a conventional or SP-teacher learning experience. Both groups received the same video tutorial, instructor guidance, and basic SP feedback (comfort and professionalism). The SP-teaching group received additional instruction (landmarks, transducer technique, and troubleshooting) from the SP-teachers when session instructors were assisting others. Students evaluated the session and were subsequently assessed through direct observation. Results: = 0.002, d =1.75). Both groups rated their sessions highly. Conclusions: Students that received SP-teaching were observed to better acquire images and achieved higher entrustment scores. In this pilot study, SP-teachers had a positive effect on acquisition of POCUS skills.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.444 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".