Pediatric Code White! - Interprofessional collaboration in the management of youths who are agitated: a simulation pilot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(250) A pediatric pilot simulation for health profession students was offered as a 2-hour workshop. This interprofessional educational (IPE) activity focused on interprofessional management of a youth who is agitated (YWA). The aim of the pilot was to improve students’ comfort and preparedness for these situations. Enrolment was limited to 12 learners to maximize engagement, and 10 learners from five disciplines participated. To assess the pilot, learners were invited to complete surveys before and after the pilot simulation to share their experiences in engaging with patients and youths who were agitated. Median scores of learners’ preparedness changed before and after the pilot, regarding their abilities to: 1) recognize signs of agitation (3.0 vs. 3.5, p=0.06), maintain personal safety (2.5 vs 3.0, p=0.008), de-escalate the situation (2.0 vs 3.0, p=0.002) and work with other health professionals (3 vs 4, p=0.02). On a 7-point global change scale, learners had a positive change in their comfort level to interact with a YWA, ranging 5 (somewhat better) to 7 (much better). Learners’ feedback showed that the pilot simulation gave them opportunities to work on several IPE domains listed in the Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaboratives’ IPE Competency framework (Team Communications, Collaborative Relationships, Collaborative Leadership and Team Functioning). This Pediatric Code White pilot simulation enhanced learners’ overall comfort and preparedness for working with YWA after this pilot simulation, satisfying the learning objectives of the knowledge and skills domains, and addressing several IPE competency domains. Understanding and managing the psychosocial care of youth in healthcare environments are an important and can positively inform learners’ future practices.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".