Dissemination of a Pediatric Musculoskeletal POCUS Scoring System via Virtual Education: A Proof-of-Concept Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Point of care pediatric musculoskeletal POCUS scanning and scoring protocols for childhood arthritis have emerged in recent years. However, pediatric musculoskeletal POCUS curricula in rheumatology fellowship programs are limited due to availability of trained faculty and resources. This proof-of-concept study investigated the effectiveness of educational methods for a pediatric musculoskeletal POCUS scoring protocol among fellows and physicians of differing subspecialties. Educational methods assessed included recorded videos and virtual review sessions. Effectiveness was assessed by calculating interrater reliability for the musculoskeletal POCUS scoring systems using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Following training sessions, participants then underwent scoring exercise(s) until the goal of an excellent ICC ≥ 0.75 was reached. Four participants completed two rounds of virtual education, review, and scoring sessions. Excellent interrater reliability was achieved for most views. This proof-of-concept study demonstrated virtual education covering advanced concepts of pediatric musculoskeletal POCUS provides a knowledge base for physicians from different subspecialties and various experience.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".