MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890961108 · doi:10.20884/1.jks.2018.13.1.754

The Effect of Quarter Turn from Prone on Oxygen Saturation among Premature Babies with Respiratory Distress Syndrome

2018· article· en· W2890961108 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Puji Lestari, Dian Susmarini, Sidik Awaludin

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Keperawatan Soedirman · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProne positionRespiratory distressOxygen saturationPediatricsQuarter (Canadian coin)AnesthesiaOxygen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rate of death and illnesses on premature babies is mostly respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). Desaturated-period frequently occurs on premature babies with RDS. One intervention to prevent it is a quarter turn from prone position. The research design was pre-experimental study with one group pre- and post-test design. This study involved 20 respondents that were selected with consecutive sampling technique. The setting of the research was in Perinatology ward at Prof. Dr. Margono Soekarjo. The oxygen saturation was examined before and after 2 hours of intervention. Data was then analyzed with Wilcoxon test. The results showed that median value of SpO2 before quarter turn from prone position was 94%, and its value after two hours of intervention was 96.5%. It was found that there was a significant effect in giving quarter turn from prone position to oxygen saturation on premature babies with RDS. Quarter turn from prone position was able to increase oxygen saturation on premature babies with RDS and is possible to be implemented in perinatology room.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Keperawatan SoedirmanSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207