MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416344558 · doi:10.24908/pocusj.v10i02.19092

SpacED POCUS: A Randomized Controlled Trial of an Adaptive Spaced Education POCUS Curriculum for Medical Students

2025· article· en· W4416344558 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anelah McGinness, S.L. Hancock, Megan Hilbert, Jane Soung, Emily Lovallo

Bibliographic record

VenuePOCUS Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Pittsburgh
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialTest (biology)CurriculumEducational measurementUltrasound

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated the effectiveness, retention, engagement, and acceptability of adaptive spaced education (spacED) for improving the accuracy of point of care ultrasound (POCUS) image interpretation by medical students. From July 2022-May 2023, students (n=36) were randomized into two groups and each assigned 50 unique POCUS cases: cardiac/vascular or lung/FAST. Each one served as the control for the other group. We measured effectiveness (% posttest 1 - % pretest), six-month retention (% posttest 2 - % posttest 1), engagement (% cases completed), and acceptability (% would recommend). Twenty-nine students (81%) completed the study. On average, 38.6% of cases were completed over the six-month study period. There was a significant increase in test scores covering FAST (Focused Assessment with Sonography in Trauma) (+18%), lung (+25%), and vascular (+23%, all p<0.01). Six-month FAST and lung scores did not have significant loss (+3% and -10%, p >0.05). Acceptability was high; 96% of students indicated they would participate again. Despite an imperfect case completion rate, for some applications, spacED was an effective, long-lasting, and acceptable method for teaching POCUS interpretation to medical students.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePOCUS JournalSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207