New Perspectives on Long Stay Patients in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit: Definition, Characteristics and Impact
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For many children and their families, access to care in a pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) is vital.Unfortunately, as a rival good, it is also limited.This thesis analyzes the group which uses the most of this important and scarce good: long stay patients (LSPs).Using an original survey of PICU practitioners across Canada and an original dataset of a year of PICU admissions from a particular PICU, this thesis applies a unique mix of qualitative and quantitative methods to draw conclusions and generate hypotheses.Two findings are particularly noteworthy: a new theoretical framework for dichotomizing LSPs into "high-need" and "high-dependency" and the potential existence of "congestion effects" in which additional LSPs at any given time force PICUs to ration the care they can make available to any individual patient.AFT-Accelerated Failure Time CHEO-Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario CCI-Chronically Critical Ill ICU-Intensive Care Unit LOS-Length of Stay LSP-Long Stay Patient PICU-Pediatric Intensive Care Unit PH-Proportional Hazards PRISM-Pediatric Risk of Mortality Score ROC-Receiver Operator Curve
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 | 0.009 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".