61: Effect of an Educational Presentation on Knowledge and Attitudes Towards Management of Extremely Premature Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A guideline regarding perinatal management of extremely premature infants (EPI – 22–25 wks GA) is being developed in Ottawa. To date, no research has examined the immediate effect of healthcare providers (HCP) education on knowledge and attitudes regarding EPI, despite the fact that assessment of barriers and facilitators is critical to guideline implementation. 1) To determine if HCP knowledge of and attitudes towards EPI changed after attending a presentation about survival and neurodevelopmental impairment of EPI and associated ethical issues; 2) to explore the correlation between knowledge and attitudes of HCP. Local HCP (neonatal and obstetrical nurses, trainees and consultants; pediatricians) working with EPI or their parent(s) attended a presentation. Participants completed a pre/post survey. Changes in knowledge and attitudes were analyzed using the McNemar test and marginal homogeneity test. Association between knowledge and attitudes was assessed using Spearman correlation. One hundred and sixty of 508 potential participants attended a presentation (attendance rate = 31%); 130 completed both surveys (response rate = 81%). HCP knowledge for each GA significantly improved following the presentation (P≤0.001). Of the 16 items assessing HCP attitudes, all but one demonstrated a significant ‘positive’ shift in the modal category (i.e. more likely to consider resuscitation) (P=0.04 to P<0.001) after the presentation. Based on post-presentation responses, Spearman correlation between knowledge and attitudes ranged from 0.04 to 0.40 with a median of 0.22 (eg. Table). Some attitudes did not significantly correlate with HCP knowledge (eg. use of epi during resuscitation of 24 wk infant based on survival knowledge (P=0.16)). The survey results revealed a statistically significant improvement in knowledge and alteration in attitudes of HCP after attending a presentation about EPI. The correlation between knowledge and attitudes varied but was generally low.
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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".