Article 14: Joint Simulation Training for Correctional Officers and Healthcare Providers in a Correctional System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the correctional setting, correctional officers and healthcare providers become immersed in a variety of emergencies in a first responder capacity, requiring organized team approaches and aligned goals. A training gap was identified as healthcare providers and correctional officers facilitate separate training initiatives with minimal focus and education surrounding their collaborative efforts in emergency response situations. The Joint Simulation Training Program (JST) was designed to address this gap, allowing staff the opportunity to practice responding to emergencies together through simulation training. Simulation is an interactive educational technique for teaching knowledge as well as technical, clinical and behavioural skills to participants as they respond to immersive scenarios that replicate real-life events. This is the first joint experiential training initiative undertaken across Provincial Correctional Centres, in Alberta, Canada, and presumably internationally due to a paucity of existing programs in the literature. The case study presented in this paper outlines the design, implementation, and outcomes of this innovative interprofessional training program. The lessons learned from this transformative program should help shape future training initiatives in corrections education, to better prepare these interprofessional teams to work in unpredictable environments.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".