Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42527509›Full record

Articlenpj health systems2026

Modeling nursing care tasks in simulated emergency scenarios: insights for clinical training and practice.

Nicholas E Anton, Aditya M Malusare, Vaneet Aggarwal, Denny Yu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in npj health systems, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nicholas E Anton *Edwardson School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Aditya M Malusare *Edwardson School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Vaneet AggarwalEdwardson School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA.
Denny YuEdwardson School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA. dennyyu@purdue.edu.

Funding

National Science Foundation 2129097
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rapid nurse decision-making is needed to detect patient deterioration and prevent mortality. Current approaches to support nurses' decisions involve diagnostic data processing and providing a decision with little explanation. Our team aimed to demonstrate the utility of attention architecture to model sequential nurse-patient care actions. Experienced nurses and students completed patient care simulations. Nurse actions were systematically coded and analyzed using our model, consisting of an attention encoder to sequentially process and predict nurse behavior. Performance of our model was compared to recurrent neural networks and long-short term memory models based on accuracy, precision, recall, and F1 score. Behavioral data from 24 nurses (11 experienced nurses and 13 nursing students) were collected during patient care simulations. Nineteen unique types of actions were distilled down to 8 common actions. There were 33 episodes captured (i.e., 33 unique sequences of patient care actions), including a total of 1024 actions (i.e., an average of 31 ± 11 actions). Results showed that the attention model outperformed the other models on all metrics except for precision. Our team demonstrated that machine learning can model sequential nurse actions. These results could be leveraged to provide real-time guidance to support novice nurses' decision-making in the simulated environment.

Identifiers

PMID42527509
PMCPMC13354240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.