Audit of pulse oximetry screening for critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) in newborns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of a new screening protocol for critical congenital heart disease (CCHD). BACKGROUND: In March 2014, the Ontario Provincial Council for Maternal Child Health (PCMCH) recommended screening for CCHD, utilizing pulse oximetry to measure oxygen saturation as part of the newborn examination. However, this is yet to be implemented in all hospitals. METHOD: An audit of consecutive healthy normal newborn patients in a secondary level centre in Ontario with early adoption of the screening recommendation over a 1-year period was undertaken. RESULTS: The median age of screening was 25 hours (6 to 80 hours). Compliance was 88% (95% if one excludes deliveries by a midwife as they did not agree to comply). Four patients screened positive and were seen by a paediatrician in consultation but did not have CCHD (specificity 99.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The current study shows that screening was successfully implemented in a Canadian hospital, with high specificity (99.4%) and good compliance (88%). Reasons for non-acceptance of screening by midwives need to be addressed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.083 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".