MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sleep in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

2007· review· en· W2322905558 on OpenAlexaff
Valérie Bertelle, Anna Sevestre, K. Laou-Hap, M. C. Nagahapitiye, Jacques Sizun

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeonatal intensive care unitPolysomnographySleep (system call)Intensive careDuration (music)PediatricsIntensive care medicinePsychiatryElectroencephalography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent experimental data suggest a strong role for sleep in brain development. As sleep is the predominant behavioral state in the term and especially the preterm newborn, these data underline the importance of respecting sleep duration and organization within the different sleep states. Polysomnography is the preferred technique used for identification of sleep state; however, behavioral observations-under the condition that the observer is well trained-may prove as efficient. Newborns hospitalized in the neonatal intensive care unit are exposed to many stimuli and care activities that disrupt their sleep organization and may have irreversible effects on their brain development. In order to improve the long-term neurobehavioral outcome of these high-risk subjects, a consistent care approach is proposed. Application of the Neonatal Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program decreases environmental stressful events and promotes harmonious well-being behaviors, based on an individual approach. This strategy has encouraging results, showing an increase in sleep duration under Neonatal Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program conditions, but further studies are needed to assess its long-term neurobehavioral impact.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations132
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal NursingSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207