MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

From Diagnosis to Birth

2008· article· en· W2322363492 on OpenAlex
Anita Catlin, Björk Áskelsdóttir, Sherrill Conroy, Gwen R. Rempel

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

VenueAdvances in Neonatal Care · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFeelingPrenatal ultrasoundNeonatal intensive care unitPregnancyNursingPrenatal carePrenatal diagnosisPediatricsObstetricsFamily medicineFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Of 350,000 Canadian children born each year, 2% to 3% will have a serious congenital anomaly. Because of recent ultrasound diagnostic improvements and increased frequency of prenatal scans, many anomalies are determined prenatally, with more parents receiving disturbing, unanticipated news of an anomaly. This article highlights the experiences, concerns, and healthcare needs of parents who receive a prenatal diagnosis of congenital anomaly during routine ultrasound and choose to continue with the pregnancy. Examples from parent interviews describing their experience complement the sparse literature dealing with this phenomenon. Parents describe their experience from antenatal diagnosis and preparation for the child's birth and subsequent admission to the neonatal intensive care unit. Attention is paid to how neonatal nurses can positively influence this process by attending to parents' feelings or moods. The conclusion includes recommendations for neonatal nursing care for these vulnerable parents.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.347 · 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