Continuing education for healthcare professionals: in situ simulation of cardiac arrest in primary care*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The article aims to explore the experiences of primary care health professionals in participating in situ simulation as a strategy for continuing education in the care of individuals in cardiopulmonary arrest situations. This is a retrospective and documentary study with a qualitative approach, conducted with primary care health professionals from two Municipal Health Centers located in the city of Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brazil. A questionnaire comprising four open-ended questions was administered at the conclusion of six university extension courses, which were developed between July and September 2023. Thematic-categorical content analysis was utilised to structure the data. The results of the research project are presented in the following section. The study involved the administration of questionnaires to 74 health professionals, which enabled the construction of two categories: “Cardiopulmonary resuscitation course using in situ simulation” and “In situ simulation as a continuing education strategy.” Satisfaction with participating in the in situ simulation was identified, as was the motivation to learn more about the subject and the importance of using an active methodology in continuing education, as well as the potential for team education in the workplace. We observed the power of in situ simulation as a strategy for continuing health education for professionals working in primary care, specifically focusing on cardiopulmonary resuscitation in adults. The participants’ experience demonstrated the efficacy of a teaching method based on active methodology in fostering their participation and motivating them to learn from the experience of in situ simulation.
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) | 0.001 | 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".