MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391402869 · doi:10.1186/s12912-024-01742-1

Standard practices in cardiac monitoring: training needs of intensive care unit nurses

2024· article· en· W4391402869 on OpenAlex
Angela Giusti, Marília Estêvam Cornélio, Élaine Machado de Oliveira, Jean‐François Giguère, Maria Cecília Bueno Jayme Gallani

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Nursing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFundo de Apoio ao Ensino, à Pesquisa e Extensão, Universidade Estadual de Campinas
KeywordsMedicineNursingIntensive careHealth careMedical educationCoronary care unitPsychological interventionMedical emergencyKnowledge managementIntensive care medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Enforcing practice standards for cardiac monitoring in intensive care units (ICUs) has been shown to reduce misdiagnoses and inappropriate interventions. Continuous professional development (CPD) programs are committed to aligning clinical practices with recommended standards. The crucial initial phase in CPD development involves assessing the training needs of the targeted population. OBJECTIVE: To assess the training needs of ICU nurses in cardiac monitoring. The overarching goal was to formulate a focused Continuous Professional Development (CPD) program geared towards implementing standard practices in cardiac monitoring. METHODS: This study employed a generic qualitative approach with a descriptive design, utilizing interviews and focus groups from July to September 2018. Involving 16 ICU nurses. Content analysis was employed, encompassing transcription, fluctuant and iterative reading, unitization, categorization, coding, description, and interpretation. RESULTS: All nurses recognized cardiac monitoring's importance in the ICU but reported barriers to its effective implementation which were related to factors that could addressed by a CPD as insufficient knowledge and skills. Training needs were identified in both clinical and technical aspects, with recommendations for practical and theoretical activities and e-learning strategies. Barriers related to organizational aspects (equipment and communication within the healthcare team) were also mentioned. CONCLUSION: ICU nurses presented clear and specific training needs related to cardiac monitoring as knowledge, skills, and competencies. Other organizational aspects were also reported as barriers. Addressing these learning needs through targeted CPD aligned with organizational initiatives can contribute to enhancing the quality of cardiac monitoring practices in ICUs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.176
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.273 · 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