MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Changing the Use of Electronic Fetal Monitoring and Labor Support: A Case Study of Barriers and Facilitators

2004· article· en· W2061382420 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBirth · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineEarly adopterNursingPsychological interventionMedicineOrganizational cultureFocus groupMedical educationPsychologyBusinessPublic relationsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Decreasing the use of continuous electronic fetal monitoring and increasing professional labor support for low-risk pregnancies are recommended by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada. This study explored factors influencing the successful (and unsuccessful) introduction of an evidence-based fetal health surveillance guideline. METHODS: This qualitative case study was conducted at two tertiary and one community hospital. Data were collected in 14 clinician focus groups (51 nurses), followed by 8 interviews with nurse administrators and educators. Analysis of verbatim transcripts and unit records included coding and categorizing data to form profiles that were compared across hospitals. RESULTS: Implementation of the guideline recommendations in the hospital settings was affected by many different factors originating in the practice environment, with the potential adopters, and related to the characteristics of the guideline. The influences of these diverse factors interacted sometimes to magnify or counteract each other's effect. The physical setting, adopter concerns, and the medicolegal issues surrounding the guideline played critical roles in uptake. In addition, changes preceding the introduction of the recommendations, the institution's agenda, and nursing and medical leadership influenced the uptake of guideline recommendations. The number and experience of nurses in each setting and availability of equipment also affected guideline acceptance and use. CONCLUSIONS: When implementing best practice, it is important to identify organizational barriers to the change that will need managing by the appropriate level of administration in the organization. Careful tailoring of implementation interventions to the barriers originating with the potential adopters is also necessary. Be prepared for unanticipated effects.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.244 · 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