Teaching pointing and calling (Shisa Kanko) to reduce error and improve performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Paramedics operate in high-stakes, cognitively demanding environments where lapses in attention can jeopardize patient safety. While team-based communication strategies are commonly taught, there is a need for self-directed methods that support situational awareness and error prevention. 'Pointing and Calling' (P&C) is a Japanese technique that uses verbal and physical cues to heighten conscious attention and reduce mistakes. P&C was integrated into the Advanced Care Paramedic curriculum over three weeks covering conceptual instruction, guided practice through low-stakes activities, and application in high-fidelity simulations. Students employed P&C during critical tasks and received feedback during debriefings. Evaluation using the Kirkpatrick framework showed positive engagement, skill uptake, and transfer to other learning contexts. Several key lessons were identified for implementing training on P&C, including clarifying that P&C is a personal cognitive tool, not a directive to others. P&C's simplicity, low cost, and existing evidence support implementation across healthcare settings. P&C can be effective in low and high-resource environments alike. P&C represents a practical, scalable approach to improving patient safety.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".