Smartphone and Internet Preferences of Parents
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite an abundance of research that identifies the benefits for both parent and child when parents are actively involved in their infant's care, challenges related to the best methods to engage families persist. PURPOSE: To conduct a feasibility study that aims to understand the preferences of smartphone and Internet use by parents of infants admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) related to information seeking and active participation in infant care, with a focus on pain management interventions. METHODS: A paper-based survey was distributed to 90 parents in a tertiary-level NICU from September to November 2013. RESULTS: Response rate was 80% (72 of the 90). Ninety-seven percent accessed the Internet daily, 87% using their smartphone, and ranked it as an important source of NICU information (81%), more than books (56%) and brochures (33%). Participants reported a desire to have more information on how they could provide general comfort (96%), as well as greater participation in comforting their baby during painful procedures (94%). IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Parents in the NICU want more information and greater involvement in their infant's care and pain management and place a higher value on the Internet compared with traditional resources. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Researchers and clinicians should work together to determine the quality of online resources to better support and evaluate parent use of the Internet as a health information resource. Future studies should examine parental preference regarding the optimal balance between online sources and face-to-face interactions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it