MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2486997670 · doi:10.1542/peds.2016-0655

Stronger and More Vulnerable: A Balanced View of the Impacts of the NICU Experience on Parents

2016· article· en· W2486997670 on OpenAlexaff
Annie Janvier, John D. Lantos, Judy L. Aschner, Keith J. Barrington, Beau Batton, Daniel G. Batton, Siri Fuglem Berg, Brian S. Carter, Deborah E. Campbell, Felicia Cohn, Anne Drapkin Lyerly, Dan L. Ellsbury, Avroy A. Fanaroff, Jonathan M. Fanaroff, Kristy Fanaroff, Sophie Gravel, Marlyse F. Haward, Stefan Kutzsche, Neil Marlow, Martha Montello, Nathalie L. Maitre, Joshua T. Morris, Odd G. Paulsen, Trisha Prentice, Alan R. Spitzer

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineCritically illNursingIntensive careDevelopmental psychologyIntensive care medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For parents, the experience of having an infant in the NICU is often psychologically traumatic. No parent can be fully prepared for the extreme stress and range of emotions of caring for a critically ill newborn. As health care providers familiar with the NICU, we thought that we understood the impact of the NICU on parents. But we were not prepared to see the children in our own families as NICU patients. Here are some of the lessons our NICU experience has taught us. We offer these lessons in the hope of helping health professionals consider a balanced view of the NICU's impact on families.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0030.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations88
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207