Search

Objective Construct an innovative open-learning solution that provides comprehensive training specific to Trusted Research Environments (TRE) and the broader research community of administrative data users, irrespective of their proficiency levels. DOL offers training opportunities tailored to meet each user's unique learning needs, enabling them to utilise complex, linked administrative datasets confidently and effectively for meaningful research outcomes, thereby building capacity for sustainable national data infrastructure. Approach DOL’s innovative open-learning solution offers two learning formats: adaptive and experiential. Adaptive learning provides registered users with bitesize self-paced training based on Administrative Data Research UK's priorities. Experiential learning involves online workgroups with real-world context and practical application. They meet twice a year and are designed around specific topics with frequent guest speakers who are experts in their fields. Conclusion DOL’s innovative open-learning solution empowers TREs, such as SAIL Databank, to provide well-rounded learning that fosters community support, knowledge-sharing, and networking opportunities for its users, while gathering valuable user feedback. Users can personalise learning and test their knowledge in a flexible training environment, allowing them to take charge of their learning journey. Implication In response to the increasing demand for training services from novice to advanced users, SAIL Databank adopted DOL's dual learning approach by (1) developing training courses that cover access, process, methodology, integration, and analytical tools for SAIL TRE users, (2) engaging users in a series of workgroups focused on themed datasets including Justice, Environmental, Maternal, Education, and Core Health.

BackgroundPatient simulators are an increasingly important part of medical training. They have been shown to be effective in teaching procedural skills, medical knowledge, and clinical decision-making. Recently, virtual and augmented reality simulators are being produced, but there is no research on whether these more realistic experiences cause problematic and greater stress responses as compared to standard manikin simulators. ObjectiveThe purpose of this research is to examine the psychological and physiological effects of augmented reality (AR) in medical simulation training as compared to traditional manikin simulations. MethodsA within-subjects experimental design was used to assess the responses of medical students (N=89) as they completed simulated (using either manikin or AR) pediatric resuscitations. Baseline measures of psychological well-being, salivary cortisol, and galvanic skin response (GSR) were taken before the simulations began. Continuous GSR assessments throughout and after the simulations were captured along with follow-up measures of emotion and cortisol. Participants also wrote freely about their experience with each simulation, and narratives were coded for emotional word use. ResultsOf the total 86 medical students who participated, 37 (43%) were male and 49 (57%) were female, with a mean age of 25.2 (SD 2.09, range 22-30) years and 24.7 (SD 2.08, range 23-36) years, respectively. GSR was higher in the manikin group adjusted for day, sex, and medications taken by the participants (AR-manikin: –0.11, 95% CI –0.18 to –0.03; P=.009). The difference in negative affect between simulation types was not statistically significant (AR-manikin: 0.41, 95% CI –0.72 to 1.53; P=.48). There was no statistically significant difference between simulation types in self-reported stress (AR-manikin: 0.53, 95% CI –2.35 to 3.42; P=.71) or simulation stress (AR-manikin: –2.17, 95% CI –6.94 to 2.59; P=.37). The difference in percentage of positive emotion words used to describe the experience was not statistically significant between simulation types, which were adjusted for day of experiment, sex of the participants, and total number of words used (AR-manikin: –4.0, 95% CI –0.91 to 0.10; P=.12). There was no statistically significant difference between simulation types in terms of the percentage of negative emotion words used to describe the experience (AR-manikin: –0.33, 95% CI –1.12 to 0.46; P=.41), simulation sickness (AR-manikin: 0.17, 95% CI –0.29 to 0.62; P=.47), or salivary cortisol (AR-manikin: 0.04, 95% CI –0.05 to 0.13; P=.41). Finally, preexisting levels of posttraumatic stress disorder, perceived stress, and reported depression were not tied to physiological responses to AR. ConclusionsAR simulators elicited similar stress responses to currently used manikin-based simulators, and we did not find any evidence of AR simulators causing excessive stress to participants. Therefore, AR simulators are a promising tool to be used in medical training, which can provide more emotionally realistic scenarios without the risk of additional harm.

BackgroundFemales make up more than half of medical school matriculants but only one-third of emergency medicine (EM) residents. Various factors may contribute to why fewer females choose the field of EM, such as the existing presence of females in the specialty. ObjectiveThis study is a follow-up to previous work, and a survey is used to assess current residents’ attitudes and perceptions on various factors, including those relating to sex and gender on creating rank lists as medical students and in perceived effects on residency education. MethodsA web-based survey consisting of Likert scale questions regarding a variety of factors influencing a student’s decision to create a rank list and in perceived effects on residency education was sent to current EM residents in 2020. ResultsResidents from 17 programs participated in the survey with an 18.2% (138/758) response rate. The most important factors in creating a rank list were the personality of residents in the program, location, and facility type. For factors specifically related to gender, respondents who answered affirmatively to whether the gender composition of residents affected the selection of a program in making a rank list were more likely to also answer affirmatively to subsequent questions related to the gender of program leadership (P

Introduction: Medical educators are constantly seeking methods to increase engagement in the era of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) where virtual and blended learning formats are increasingly common. Educational escape rooms have previously been used to motivate learners, enhance communication skills, and cultivate teamwork. However, it is not known whether escape rooms increase learner knowledge as compared to a lecture format. Methods: This quasi-experimental study included 30 emergency medicine residents at two programs who participated in both a virtual escape room and a lecture on infectious disease content. Learners completed a pre- and post-quiz and a tool to gauge resident motivation for each activity (the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory [IMI]). The primary objective was to determine a change in knowledge as a result of the activities, and a secondary objective was to determine resident motivation for each format. Results: At both programs learners demonstrated a significant improvement in their pre- vs. post-quiz scores for the escape rooms (University of California Irvine [UCI]: 77.8% to 88.9%, p = 0.028, Prisma: 73.81% to 89.68%, p = 0.002), whereas the lectures did not impact a statistical improvement (UCI: 73.8% to 78.6%, p = 0.460, Prisma: 85.71% to 91.27%, p = 0.236). Learners at UCI noted equivalent results on the IMI for both formats, while residents at Prisma noted they were more motivated by the escape room. Conclusion: Emergency medicine residents at two programs participating in a virtual escape room demonstrated a statistical increase in knowledge on infectious disease content as compared to a lecture format and reported positive motivation ratings for both formats, with one program preferring the escape room.

Background: A patient’s survival from cardiac arrest is improved if they receive good quality chest compressions as soon as possible. During cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training subjective assessments of chest compression quality is still common. Recently manikins allowing objective assessment have demonstrated a degree of variance with Instructor assessment. The aim of this study was to compare peer-led subjective assessment of chest compressions in three groups of participants with objective data from a manikin. Method: This was a quantitative multi-center study using data from simulated CPR scenarios. Seventy-eight Instructors were recruited, from different backgrounds; lay persons, hospital staff and emergency services personnel. Each group consisted of 13 pairs and all performed 2 ​min of chest compressions contemporaneously by peers and manikin (Brayden PRO®). The primary hypothesis was subjective and objective assessment methods would produce different test outcomes. Results: 13,227 chest compressions were assessed. The overall median score given by the manikin was 88.5% (interquartile range 71.75–95), versus 92% (interquartile range 86.75–98) by observers. There was poor correlation in scores between assessment methods (Kappa −0.051 – +0.07). Individual assessment of components within the manikin scores demonstrated good internal consistency (alpha ​= ​0.789) compared to observer scores (alpha ​= ​0.011). Conclusion: Observers from all backgrounds were consistently more generous in their assessment when compared to the manikin. Chest compressions quality influences outcome following cardiac arrest, the findings of this study support increased use of objective assessment at the earliest opportunity, irrespective of background.

Background Not enough is known about how the family justice system is working, the children and families using these services, and their wider outcomes beyond their involvement with the family court. The Nuffield Family Justice Observatory (FJO) Data Partnership, comprising a bespoke analysis platform hosted within the Secure Anonymised Information Linkage (SAIL) Databank and analytical teams at Lancaster and Swansea Universities, has been established to address this knowledge deficit. Methods Family justice data is being deposited in the SAIL Databank. Data are acquired using a standardised split-file approach, stored in an anonymised format and made available to projects as linked data using a unique encrypted project anonymised linkage field. These data can be augmented with a wealth of available health, education and other governmental/social routinely collected datasets, and future data acquired from other sources, for a range of research projects. Results Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) Cymru data has been transferred to the SAIL Databank, and agreements to transfer the Cafcass England data are being finalised. Applications are now welcomed to use these data to enhance understanding of the family justice system and children and families involved with the family courts in public and private law. Access will be facilitated through the SAIL Databank, subject to relevant governance procedures. Conclusion We will discuss the rationale of the Nuffield FJO Data Partnership, and how it aims to a) increase capacity and capability of researchers and data scientists utilising family justice and other relevant administrative datasets, b) improve understanding about the family justice system using data from the Cafcass in England and Wales, c) demonstrate the complexities and value of data linkage, and d) assist future policy and practice development. We will discuss matching rates for the Cafcass Cymru data and linkages that have been made to other datasets within the SAIL Databank. We will also set out the support available from the partnership to those wishing to access and utilise family justice data.