MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evidence‐based neonatology – today and tomorrow

2012· article· en· W1560931321 on OpenAlex
Anna Käll

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Paediatrica · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeonatologyMedicineRetinopathy of prematurityIntensive careDieticiansPediatricsBest practiceNursingFamily medicineMedical educationIntensive care medicineGestational agePregnancyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In June 2011, nearly 200 delegates from over 30 countries were gathered in Stockholm, Sweden, for the first ever evidence-based neonatology conference (EBNEO) (see Fig. 1). Three days were filled with interactive lectures and discussions. Given all good feedback from speakers and delegates, the organizers have already decided to arrange a second EBNEO, which will take place in Egypt in March 2013. –Neonatal medicine has experienced a remarkable development through research. But, it may be difficult to translate this knowledge into clinical guidelines. Our mission with the conference was to facilitate the dissemination of evidence-based neonatal medicine, and to create a platform for communication between leading experts and neonatal staff. The overall vision is that care of newborn infants should be based on the best available evidence and that all newborn babies should have the same right to the best care no matter where they are born, says Stefan Johansson, Titus Schlinzig and Mikael Norman from the EBNEO organizing committee. –The target audience was staff working in neonatal intensive care units around the world. Neonatologists, neonatal nurse practitioners, registered nurses, respiratory technicians, dieticians and other staff categories. We had representatives from all continents and a large proportion of the participants were clinically active. This resulted in an informal and interactive atmosphere throughout the meeting, says Stefan Johansson. The program was put together to get the audience an evidence-based view on a variety of hot topics in neonatology. Central line-associated blood stream infection (CLABSI), hyperbilirubinaemia, hypotension, oxygenation, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) were some of the many themes presented. In all, the evidence for and against over one hundred interventions in neonatal care was presented and discussed during the meeting. In addition, the question how to best implement new knowledge in clinical practice ran like a common thread throughout the conference. –It usually takes a long time before new evidence is implemented in clinical practice. There are also large outcome variations between different neonatal intensive care units (NICUs), even in the same country. Another problem is that many of the systematic literature reviews published today are inconclusive and fail to provide specific recommendations. There is a need for new ideas in recognition of best evidence. For example, well-designed observational studies can sometimes have the same value as randomized clinical trials, says Mikael Norman and mentions the lecture held by Professor Shoo Lee, from the Canadian neonatal network. –He presented a method for continuous evidence-based quality improvement. In addition to using available published evidence, the network collects data to evaluate local unit practices associated with outcome differences. In this way, successful practices in one NICU can be identified, tested and implemented for a faster targeted change in other NICUs, Mikael Norman explains. In this supplement to Acta Paediatrica, published online, you will find papers based on some of the presentations from the conference. To serve people who could not come to Stockholm, all lectures are also available online free of charge on the EBNEO webcast for 1 year. The EBNEO was organized by Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, together with an international program committee, but the idea to arrange a conference in evidence-based neonatology originated from 99 nicu, an international web community for professionals in neonatal medicine, with the aim to make neonatal staff share experience and knowledge regardless of geographical boundaries. –Our aim is that the conference should circulate around the world between different countries and continents. The next time we will meet in Cairo, Egypt, in March 2013, and we hope there will be a third EBNEO in 2015. We have seen that there is a need for a conference in evidence-based neonatology, and we already have a long list of topics to highlight at future EBNEO meetings, says Stefan Johansson. EBNEO conference: http://www.ebneo.org EBNEO webcast: http://www.webbtv.nu/ebneo2011 Live tweets: http://twitter.com/ebneo 99NICU web community: http://www.99nicu.org The author has declared no potential conflicts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.414
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it