MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986226283 · doi:10.7863/ultra.33.10.1833

Targeted Neonatal Echocardiography Services

2014· article· en· W1986226283 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emer Finan, Arvind Sehgal, Afif El‐Khuffash, Patrick J. McNamara

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetal echocardiographyCardiologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicinePregnancyFetusPrenatal diagnosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Targeted neonatal echocardiography refers to a focused assessment of myocardial performance and hemodynamics directed by a specific clinical question. It has become the standard of care in many parts of the world, but practice is variable, and there has been a lack of standardized training and evaluation to date. Targeted neonatal echocardiography was first introduced to Canada in 2006. The purpose of this study was to examine the characteristics of targeted neonatal echocardiography practice and training methods in Canadian neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). METHODS: A total of 142 Canadian neonatologists were invited to participate in an online survey, which was conducted in September 2010. The survey consisted of questions related to the availability of targeted neonatal echocardiography, clinical indications, benefits and risks, and training methods. RESULTS: The overall survey response rate was 65%. Forty-eight respondents (34%) indicated that targeted neonatal echocardiography was available in their units, and the program was introduced within the preceding 1 to 5 years. In centers where it was unavailable, lack of on-site echocardiography expertise was cited as the major barrier to implementation. The most common indications for targeted neonatal echocardiography included evaluation of a hemodynamically significant ductus arteriosus, systemic or pulmonary blood flow, and response to cardiovascular treatments. Only 27% of respondents, working in centers where targeted neonatal echocardiography existed, actually performed the studies themselves; most individuals completed 11 to 20 studies per month. Almost half of the respondents said that training was available in their institutions, but methods of training and evaluation were inconsistent. Eighty-seven percent of respondents reported no formalized process for assessment of ongoing competency after the initial training period. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted neonatal echocardiography is becoming more widely available and is gaining acceptance in Canadian NICUs. Although training is provided in many institutions, the process is not well established, and formal evaluation is rarely performed. This study emphasizes the need for development of standards for formalized training, evaluation, and quality assurance.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0420.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.321 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ultrasound in MedicineSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207