MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2761769420 · doi:10.1093/pch/20.5.e64a

83: Management of Infants with Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome

2015· article· en· W2761769420 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathryn Murphy, Kimberly Dow, Vijay Shah, Ruth Warre, Helen Coo

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreastfeedingCardiorespiratory fitnessGuidelineNeonatal intensive care unitPediatricsIntensive careAbstinenceEmergency medicineFamily medicineIntensive care medicinePhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) has risen dramatically in North America, resulting in increased health care resource utilization. Marked variation in management of NAS has been reported in the United States and Europe, but data from Canada are limited. Describe current NAS management practices in NICUs in Canada, including location for infant monitoring (admission to NICU vs. room-in with mother); location for pharmacological treatment; use of cardiorespiratory monitors when pharmacological treatment is initiated; breastfeeding recommendations; and discharge of infants on medication. Qualified personnel in all Level II and Level III NICUs in Canada were emailed to request their participation, with follow-up if no response was received. A medical resident administered a structured, pre-tested telephone survey and data were analyzed using SPSS. Surveys were completed by 65 of 103 units (63.1%). Common practices included having a written NAS practice guideline (92.3%); using the original or modified Finnegan's scoring system to monitor NAS signs (89.5%); using non-pharmacological treatment methods (e.g. dim lights, swaddling) (100%); using morphine as the first-line medication (96.9%); using monitors routinely during pharmacological treatment (93.8%); and admitting infants to the NICU for pharmacological treatment (89.2%). Practices that showed greater variability included where high-risk infants are observed (44.6% in the NICU, 52.3% rooming-in with the mother, 3.1% in either location or on a pediatric ward); use of adjunct medications (65.1% use overall with phenobarbital used most commonly [82.9%] followed by clonidine [41.5%]); breastfeeding practices (53.8% always encourage breastfeeding, 44.6% discourage breastfeeding if the mother is using illicit drugs, and 1.5% make recommendations on a case-by-case basis); and discharge of infants on first-line (36.9%) and adjunct medications (38.9%), where used. While most NICUs surveyed follow similar practices in scoring NAS signs and use of non-pharmacological and first-line pharmacological treatment, there is notable variation in practices related to parent involvement in care, such as maintaining the mother-infant dyad during monitoring and treatment, encouraging breastfeeding, and discharging the infant on medication. This underscores the need for further research that can be translated into best practices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects→French-language works237,207→