MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2761086158 · doi:10.1093/pch/20.5.e59a

71: NICU Staff Perceptions of Differences Between a Shared Room NICU and a Single Family Room NICU

2015· article· en· W2761086158 on OpenAlexaffabout
S Holbrook, Alexandra Howlett, Matthew Hicks, Siddartha Buddhavarapu, Kerry Hart, Jacqueline Boulton

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeonatal intensive care unitPacifierBreastfeedingIntensive careNursingObservational studyFamily medicinePediatricsIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2011, a new neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) with double-bedded (DB) rooms was opened in a tertiary children's hospital in Canada. The unit moved to a single family room (SFR) NICU 31 months later. Other authors have identified increased nursing concerns regarding safety and communication in SFR NICUs while a family-friendly environment has been cited by parents as important. To compare staff perceptions of work environment, accommodation of health care practice and extent of parental involvement in the DB and SFR NICUs. A sub-study of staff perceptions was conducted as part of a larger prospective observational cohort study of the NICU move from December 2013 to September 2014. Self-report questionnaires were administered over a one month period in the DB NICU, and during a three month interval in the new SFR NICU. The questionnaire covered demographics, perceptions of work environment, health care practice and extent of parental involvement. Questionnaire responses were compared using bivariate analyses including χ2 test. There were 44 completed questionnaires: 26 from the DB NICU, 18 from the SFR NICU. All respondents were female; a majority were nurses (83%). Staff reported better access to equipment and supplies (50% vs 94.4%, P<0.05), better privacy for family interactions (36.0% vs 100%, P<0.001), increased opportunity for bonding and breastfeeding (19.2% vs 100%, P<0.001) and better ability to control ambient lighting (34.6% vs 100%, P<0.001) in the SFR NICU. Foot traffic was identified as a problem around neonates in the BD NICU, 26.9% vs 0, P<0.05 as was the ambient noise level 26.9% vs 0%, P<0.005. Parents seemed comfortable discussing their child's condition (91.9% vs 88.8%, P=0.57), felt free to visit (94.6% vs 100%, P=1.0) and were actively involved in their child's care (94.4% vs 94.4%, P=0.63) in both units. Staff adjustment was relatively smooth. There was no difference in staff perceptions of patient safety or staff isolation, in contrast to other reports. Staff perceptions of functionality and family support in the SFR NICU were significantly improved.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units→French-language works237,207→