Long‑Term Impact of HEAT Educational Intervention in the Emergency Department in Karachi, Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Karachi faced an unprecedented heatwave in 2015, causing severe health outcomes. The heat emergency awareness and treatment (HEAT) intervention was developed to train healthcare providers to identify and manage heat‑related illnesses (HRIs). The HEAT intervention was implemented in major emergency departments (EDs) in Karachi in 2018. Objective: This study evaluated the long‑term impact of the HEAT intervention on ED physicians’ diagnosis and management of patients with HRIs in a single tertiary‑care hospital. Method: This study utilized time‑series analyses to evaluate the long‑term impact of HEAT intervention utilizing ten‑year data (pre‑intervention, 2013–2017 and post‑intervention, 2018–2022). Data were obtained from a single hospital related to diagnoses and management of HRIs for the study period. The outcomes assessed were the number of HRIs diagnosed, use of intravenous (IV) fluids, and use of sponging and ice packs. A zero‑inflated interrupted time series Poisson regression model was used to assess the impact of HEAT intervention on diagnosis and management of HRIs, while accounting for time and maximum ambient temperature. Findings: At the crude level, analyses showed a decrease in the number of HRI diagnoses (estimate = −1.63, p < 0.001*), use of IV fluids (estimate = −0.72, p = 0.09), and in the use of sponging (estimate = −0.51, p = 0.64) in the post‑intervention period. Findings from the sensitivity analyses, excluding the outlier observations due to the severe heat event of 2015, showed a statistically significant increase in HRI diagnoses (estimate = 2.18, p < 0.001*) and in the use of IV fluids (estimate = 2.07, p < 0.001*) in the post‑intervention period. Conclusion: Our educational training intervention was effective in improving HRI diagnosis and management among ED physicians from a select hospital over a long‑term period. Findings need to be generalized with caution to other settings.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".