Emergency Department Use by Infants Less Than 14 Days of Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors associated with nonacute presentation to the emergency department (ED) by infants less than 14 days of age. METHODS: A prospective survey was conducted in the pediatric ED of a teaching hospital providing voluntary in-home follow-up for families discharged within 48 hours of delivery. Participants were families of infants less than 14 days of age presenting to the ED over a 1-year period. The main outcome measure was acuteness of presenting problem. Presenting problems were classified as nonacute if the following 4 criteria were met: (i) no physician referral; (ii) nonurgent triage code assigned by a triage nurse; (iii) no investigations performed in the ED; and (iv) discharge home. RESULTS: Of the 142 eligible infants, 70 (49%) infants presented with nonacute problems. Ninety-two (65%) returned questionnaires. There was no significant difference in the proportion of nonacute problems between infants discharged at less than 48 hours of age and those discharged at more than 48 hours (P = 0.7). The proportion of nonacute problems among infants of primiparous mothers was significantly higher (64%) than among infants of multiparous mothers (24%) (P < 0.001). Infants of mothers less than 25 years of age were more likely to present with nonacute problems (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Primiparity and maternal age less than 25 years were associated with nonacute ED presentation. Acuteness of presentation to the ED was not influenced by timing of neonatal discharge. Therefore, perinatal education might be best targeted at first time mothers and young mothers to reduce the number of nonacute ED visits.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".