MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993156871 · doi:10.1542/peds.108.1.152

Attitudes of Parents and Health Care Professionals Toward Active Treatment of Extremely Premature Infants

2001· article· en· W1993156871 on OpenAlex
David L. Streiner, Saroj Saigal, Elizabeth Burrows, Barbara Stoskopf, Peter Rosenbaum

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsBaycrest HospitalMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsMedicinePsychological interventionGestational ageLow birth weightHealth professionalsBirth weightPediatricsFamily medicineHealth careNursingPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To compare the attitudes of neonatologists, neonatal nurses, the parents of extremely low birth weight (ELBW) children, and the parents of normal birth weight children toward saving infants of borderline viability and who should be involved in the decision-making process and to compare physicians' and nurses' estimates of the proportion of infants who are born at various gestational ages with regard to survival, morbidity, and treatment. METHODS: A questionnaire was given to 169 parents of ELBW children and 123 parents of term children, who were part of a longitudinal study of the outcome of ELBW infants. A similar questionnaire was completed by 98 Canadian neonatologists and 99 neonatal nurses. RESULTS: Physicians tended to be more optimistic than nurses regarding the probability of survival and freedom from serious disabilities and would recommend to parents life-saving interventions for their child at earlier gestational ages. A significant majority of parents believed that attempts should be made to save all infants, irrespective of condition or weight at birth, compared with only 6% of health professionals who endorsed this. In contrast to parents, health professionals believed that economic costs to society should be a factor in deciding whether to save an ELBW infant. However, health professionals did not believe that the economic status of the parents should be a factor, although the stress of raising an infant with disabilities should be. Most respondents believed that the parents and physicians should make the final decision but that other bodies, such as ethics committees or the courts, should not. CONCLUSION: Health care professionals must recognize that their attitudes toward saving ELBW infants differ from those of parents. Parents, whether of term or extremely premature children, are more in favor of intervening to save the infant irrespective of its weight or condition at birth than are professionals. It therefore is imperative that there be joint decision making, combining the knowledge of the physician with the wishes of the parents.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.343 · 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