Postpartum/newborn patients: who are they and do they all need the same amount of nursing care?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To obtain a quantitative description of mother-newborn presentations and to identify their nursing care requirements while in hospital. BACKGROUND: Recommendations on minimum staffing levels are broad based with implications that all new mothers and newborns are normal without complications. However, in a large tertiary centre, mother-newborn dyads do present with complications, suggesting variation in nursing care requirements. METHOD: Two studies were conducted: (1) a cross-sectional retrospective, descriptive study; and (2) a convenience sampling survey professional nurses' expert opinions. RESULTS: A sample of 1224 mother and/or newborn presentations was retrospectively classified. Almost half of the patient presentations were classified as having complications. Nursing care ratios required for postpartum ranged from 1:1 to 9:1. CONCLUSION: An objective classification system was obtained from nursing experts in caring for mother and newborn with variable needs, in a hospitalized setting. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: This comprehensive classification system can be used to objectively align nursing resources to mother/newborn care needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".