Early warning- and track and trigger systems for newborn infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tools for clinical assessment and escalation of observation and treatment are insufficiently established in the newborn population. We aimed to provide an overview over early warning- and track and trigger systems for newborn infants and performed a nonsystematic review based on a search in Medline and Cinahl until November 2015. Search terms included ‘infant, newborn’, ‘early warning score’, and ‘track and trigger’. Experts in the field were contacted for identification of unpublished systems. Outcome measures included reference values for physiological parameters including respiratory rate and heart rate, and ways of quantifying the extent of deviations from the reference. Only four neonatal early warning scores were published in full detail, and one system for infants with cardiac disease was considered as having a more general applicability. Temperature, respiratory rate, heart rate, SpO 2 , capillary refill time, and level of consciousness were parameters commonly included, but the definition and quantification of ‘abnormal’ varied slightly. The available scoring systems were designed for term and near-term infants in postpartum wards, not neonatal intensive care units. In conclusion, there is a limited availability of neonatal early warning scores. Scoring systems for high-risk neonates in neonatal intensive care units and preterm infants were not identified.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".