Knowledge to Action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To quantify practice changes associated with implementing a clinical practice guideline for the second stage of labor in term nulliparous women with epidural anesthesia and to describe the lessons learned about knowledge translation. The main clinical practice guideline recommendation was waiting up to 2 hours before pushing after full dilatation. DESIGN AND METHODS: Pre- and post-evaluation of clinical outcomes and knowledge translation strategies associated with implementing the second stage of labor clinical practice guideline at two birthing units within a large teaching hospital. RESULTS: The implementation of the clinical practice guideline resulted in a significant increase in median waiting time before pushing of 33 minutes at Site 1. This change was also reflected in the twofold increase in the proportion of women waiting longer than 120 minutes before pushing at this site. There was no change in waiting time at Site 2. The duration of the second stage did not change significantly at either site. The median pushing time decreased at both sites but was only statistically significant at Site 1. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Bringing about practice change in obstetrics is complex. The measured change in this study was less than we expected. Greater success might have been achieved by enhancing feedback to care providers and more frequent audits of practice. We need to better understand the subtle influences in attitude and culture that prevented successful implementation in one site. For units considering a similar process, we recommend a commensurately greater level of presence in the units to encourage compliance with the clinical practice guideline in order to achieve the desired level of practice change.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".