ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Confidence-weighted Testing as an Impactful Education Intervention within a Pediatric Sepsis Quality Improvement Initiative.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConfidence-weighted testing assesses learners' beliefs about their knowledge and skills. As part of a hospital-wide quality improvement initiative to enhance care for pediatric patients with suspected sepsis, we developed a novel intervention using confidence-weighted testing to identify institutional areas of misinformation and knowledge gaps while also providing real-time feedback to individual learners.
methodsWe developed pediatric sepsis eLearning modules incorporating confidence-weighted testing. We distributed them to nurses, advanced practitioners, and physicians in emergency departments and acute care/non-intensive care unit inpatient settings in our hospital system. We analyzed completion and response data over 2 years following module distribution. Our outcomes included completion,
resultsEighty-three percent of assigned learners completed the modules (1,463/1,754). Although nurses had significantly more misinformation and struggled more than physicians and advanced practitioners, learners of all roles achieved 100% mastery as part of module completion. The greatest CHM and struggle were found in serum lactate interpretation's nuances and the hemodynamic shock states commonly seen in sepsis.
conclusionsOur novel application of confidence-weighted testing enhanced learning by correcting learners' misinformation. It also identified systems issues and institutional knowledge gaps as targets for future improvement.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.