Effectiveness of a Novel Tablet Application in Reducing Guideline Deviations During Pediatric Cardiac Arrest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Deviations from international resuscitation guidelines during the management of pediatric cardiac arrest are frequent and affect clinical outcomes. An interactive tablet application (app), PediAppRREST, was developed to reduce guideline deviations during pediatric cardiac arrest. Objective: To assess the effectiveness of PediAppRREST in improving the management of simulated in-hospital pediatric cardiac arrest. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter 3-group simulation-based randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 2020 to December 2021 at 4 Italian university hospitals (Padua, Florence, Rome, Novara). Participants included residents in pediatrics, emergency medicine, and anesthesiology. Analyses were conducted as intention-to-treat. Data were analyzed from January to June 2022. Interventions: Teams were randomized to 1 of 3 study groups: an intervention group that used the PediAppRREST app; a control group that used a paper-based cognitive aid, the Pediatric Advanced Life Support (PALS) pocket card; and a control group that used no cognitive aids. All the teams managed the same standardized simulated scenario of nonshockable pediatric cardiac arrest. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the number of deviations from guidelines, measured by a 15-item checklist based on guideline recommendations. The main secondary outcomes were quality of chest compressions, team clinical performance (measured by the Clinical Performance Tool), and perceived team leader's workload. Study outcomes were assessed via video reviews of the scenarios. Results: Overall 100 teams of 300 participants (mean [SD] age, 29.0 [2.2] years; 195 [65%] female) were analyzed by intention-to-treat, including 32 teams randomized to the PediAppRREST group, 35 teams randomized to the PALS control group, and 33 teams randomized to the null control group. Participant characteristics (210 pediatric residents [70%]; 48 anesthesiology residents [16%]; 42 emergency medicine residents [14%]) were not statistically different among the study groups. The number of deviations from guidelines was significantly lower in the PediAppRREST group than in the control groups (mean difference vs PALS control, -3.0; 95% CI, -4.0 to -1.9; P < .001; mean difference vs null control, -2.6; 95% CI, -3.6 to -1.5; P < .001). Clinical Performance Tool scores were significantly higher in the PediAppRREST group than control groups (mean difference vs PALS control, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.4 to 2.3; P = .002; mean difference vs null control, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.2 to 2.1; P = .01). The other secondary outcomes did not significantly differ among the study groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, the use of the PediAppRREST app resulted in fewer deviations from guidelines and a better team clinical performance during the management of pediatric cardiac arrest. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04619498.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".