Emergency medicine residents and performance under pressure: learning from elite athletes’ experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The skills of coping with stress and pressure within emergency medicine are conveyed informally and inconsistently throughout residency training. This study aims to identify key psychological competencies used by elite athletes in high-pressure situations, which can be integrated into a formal curriculum to support emergency medicine residents' performance in high acuity settings. DESIGN: We conducted a scoping review spanning 20 years to identify the relevant psychological competencies used by elite athletes (Olympic or World level) to perform under pressure. We used controlled vocabulary to search within Medline, PsycInfo and SportDiscuss databases. A standardized charting method was used by the team of four authors to extract relevant data. RESULTS: The scoping review identified 18 relevant articles, including 707 athletes from 49 different sports and 11 countries, 64 data items were extracted, and 6 main themes were identified. The main psychological competencies included the ability to sustain a high degree of motivation and confidence, to successfully regulate thoughts, emotions and arousal levels, and to maintain resilience in the face of adversity. CONCLUSION: We used the main psychological competencies identified from our scoping review to develop a hypothesis generated framework to guide the integration of performance psychology principles into future emergency medicine residency programs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.081 | 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".