MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132154417 · doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsm096

Practices and Provisions for Parents Sleeping Overnight with a Hospitalized Child

2007· article· en· W2132154417 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robyn Stremler, Lam Thi Le, Christopher S. Parshuram

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pediatric Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedicinePediatricsFamily medicinePsychiatryDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To describe practices affecting parents' overnight stays, provisions for parents sleeping overnight and parents' involvement in overnight care of their hospitalized child. METHODS: A cross-sectional telephone survey of Canadian and American hospitals with more or equal to 50 acute pediatric beds and more or equal to two pediatric wards was conducted. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 135 hospitals (77% response rate). All general pediatric units allowed parents to sleep at the bedside overnight; higher acuity units limited parental stays. The majority of hospitals limited overnight visitors at the bedside to one parent, and few hospitals routinely allowed siblings to sleep overnight. One hundred and thirty-three (99%) hospitals reported parental involvement in their child's care at night, with 52 (39%) stating this was an expectation. CONCLUSIONS: In general, parents are given the opportunity to stay at the bedside overnight, but barriers exist that limit opportunities for sleep during their child's hospitalization, and serve to separate families who have a hospitalized child.

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 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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pediatric PsychologySame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207