MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2199671167 · doi:10.1055/s-0035-1563545

In-Bed Mobilization in Critically Ill Children: A Safety and Feasibility Trial

2015· article· en· W2199671167 on OpenAlex
María Constanza Trillos Chacón, Rachel Walker, Samah Al-Harbi, Heather Clark, Ghadah Al-Mahr, Brian W. Timmons, Lehana Thabane, Karen Choong

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

VenueJournal of Pediatric Intensive Care · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineQuartilePhysical therapyCardiorespiratory fitnessIntervention (counseling)Randomized controlled trialProspective cohort studyMobilizationSurgeryConfidence intervalNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of implementing two methods of in-bed mobilization in critically ill children. This prospective cohort trial was conducted at McMaster Children's Hospital, Pediatric Critical Care Unit (PCCU). Hemodynamically stable patients aged 3 to 17 years with a longer than 24-hour PCCU stay were eligible to participate in the study. Children with cardiorespiratory instability, already mobilizing well or at their baseline mobility, anticipated death during this PCCU admission, and those with contraindications to mobilization were excluded. Two methods of mobilization were applied for a maximum of 2 days, respectively, depending on the level of consciousness and cognitive ability of the participant. In-bed cycling was used for passive mobilization and interactive video games (VG) were used for active mobilization. The primary outcomes were safety and feasibility. Secondary outcomes were physical activity during the study period, as reflected by accelerometer measurements. A total of 406 patients were screened over 1 year, 35 of who were eligible and 31 (89%) consented to participate. Median age of participants was 11 years (quartile 1 is 6 years and quartile 3 is 14 years), and 15 (48%) were male. Twenty-five (81%) participants received the study intervention, 22 (88%) of who received the intervention within 24 hours of consent. Twenty-one (84%) participants received in-bed cycling, five (20%) received VG, and only one received both. Fifteen (60%) completed the prescribed 2-day intervention, while in 11 (44%) the intervention was interrupted or not applied, most commonly because the patient was transferred out of the PCCU. Physical activity was greater during the intervention compared with nonintervention times with in-bed cycling, but not with VG. There were no adverse events attributable to the intervention. This pilot reveals that in-bed cycling can enhance physical activity, and appears to be safe and feasible in this group of critically ill children. VG was feasible only in a minority of patients who were cooperative and age appropriate. Further research is necessary to evaluate the efficacy and most appropriate methods of enhancing mobility and rehabilitation in this population.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.135
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.135
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.294 · 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