Implementation and Evaluation of a Best Practice Initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Venipuncture is now the standard method of phlebotomy for well newborn infants at Kingston General Hospital (KGH), Canada. Newborn infants require at least one blood sample for mandatory genetic screening. Some will require additional samples for monitoring of hyperbilirubinemia or other laboratory tests. A change from capillary heel sticks to venipuncture was implemented when the lancets in use were discontinued and a suitable replacement could not be found at the time. A review of the literature discovered a Cochrane Neonatal Review that supported newborn venipuncture as a safe, pain-reducing practice when performed by trained phlebotomists. As a result, a quality improvement project was developed to implement the practice of venipuncture for the well newborn. The implementation and evaluation included lectures, demonstrations, return demonstrations, and eventual integration into clinical practice. Process and summative evaluation demonstrated a willingness of staff to learn a new procedure, particularly when they had identified the need for change. In addition, infants were not subjected to multiple, ineffective blood draws.
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 | 0.001 | 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".