MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404727059 · doi:10.1136/openhrt-2024-002865

Heart valve clinics: an expanding role for the clinical scientists - validation of a framework for competency and certification

2024· article· en· W4404727059 on OpenAlexaff
Can Zhou, Jerusalem Fekadu, Anna Hayes, Nathalie Aure, Masha Sivalinganathan, Lucy Bowen, Brian Campbell, Sheila Subbiah, Curtis Page, Sophie Bennett, Ronak Rajani, Camelia Demetrescu

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Heart · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationSession (web analytics)MedicineCLARITYMultidisciplinary approachHealth careMedical educationFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Valvular heart disease (VHD) represents a significant burden on healthcare systems worldwide, necessitating specialised care through multidisciplinary valve clinics. However, there is a lack of a standardised training and certification framework for clinical scientists and specialist physiologists (CSSPs) working within specialist valve clinics (SVCs). This study aimed to design, implement and validate a competency framework dedicated to training and certifying valve CSSPs to enhance patient outcomes and establish standardised care. METHODS: A comprehensive competency framework was developed and implemented, consisting of two levels: Enhanced Valve Clinic Training (EVCT) and Advanced Valve Clinic Training (AVCT). The programme was trialled at Guy's Valve Clinic, London, over a 12-month period. Validation was undertaken through trainee and patient feedback, including multiple-choice questions, clinical skills assessments, and patient satisfaction surveys. RESULTS: Nine CSSPs completed the EVCT and four the AVCT. All participants passed their certification examinations with scores ranging from 80% to 95%. The time to complete each programme averaged 6 months. After certification, clinical queries raised by EVCT trainees averaged 1.2 per session but dropped by 75% to 0.3 per session in the AVCT group, indicating greater confidence and independence in managing cases. Physician review of trainee-led cases led to additional tests or treatment changes in 23% of cases and referrals to physician clinics in 11%. Patient feedback was positive: 95% felt confident in the clinical scientists' knowledge, and 100% were satisfied with the clarity of their care plans and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of this training and certification framework demonstrated enhanced clinical outcomes and care delivery in SVCs. By advocating for formal recognition and accreditation of valve clinic training, this framework could serve as a model for national and international standardisation in valve care and clinical training.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.402 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen HeartSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207