MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Toward understanding evidence uptake: Semirecumbency for pneumonia prevention

2002· article· en· W2056297668 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNosocomial Infections in ICU
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
FundersCenters for Disease Control and PreventionAmerican Thoracic Society
KeywordsMedicineFocus groupVentilator-associated pneumoniaIntensive care unitIntensive carePneumoniaNursingHarmQualitative researchRandomized controlled trialHealth careMEDLINEIntensive care medicineFamily medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Randomized trials show that the semirecumbent position compared with the supine position is associated with less gastroesophageal aspiration and pneumonia in patients receiving mechanical ventilation. However, semirecumbency is inconsistently used in practice. The objective of this study was to understand the perspectives of intensive care unit clinicians regarding the determinants and consequences of semirecumbency. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews and focus groups. SETTING: Three university-affiliated intensive care units. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 93 intensive care unit clinicians, including bedside nurses, respiratory therapists, physiotherapists, nutritionists, residents, fellows, and intensivists. METHODS: We elicited perceptions about benefits and harms of semirecumbency, factors promoting and deterring use, and health systems changes to encourage semirecumbency. Interview and focus group notes were analyzed inductively to identify emerging themes. Validation methods involved triangulation by multidisciplinary analysis of several data sources collected through multiple methods and member checking. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intensivists and nutritionists were familiar with semirecumbency as a potential pneumonia prevention strategy, whereas other clinicians were not. When made aware of the evidence, all participants endorsed semirecumbency. Nurses perceived that the main determinant of semirecumbency was physicians' orders, whereas intensivists perceived that the main determinant was nursing preference. Participants identified barriers to semirecumbency related to useful alternative positions (e.g., lateral position), contraindications (e.g., hemodynamic instability), risk of harm (e.g., decubitus ulcers), safety (e.g., sliding out of the bed), and resources (e.g., insufficient beds facilitating semirecumbency). Education, guidelines, reminders, audit and feedback, charting, and quality improvement initiatives were advocated to promote semirecumbency. CONCLUSIONS: Under-utilization of semirecumbency for pneumonia prevention is influenced by insufficient awareness of its benefit, real and perceived deterrents, poor agreement about implementation responsibility, and lack of enabling and reinforcing strategies. Cognitive, behavioral, and administrative approaches to enhancing evidence uptake may be needed in the complex, dynamic intensive care unit setting.

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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.006
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.305
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.124 · 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