MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2947201183 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz066.018

19 Parental presence during pediatric interfacility critical care transport

2019· article· en· W2947201183 on OpenAlexaffabout
Virginie Plante, Jean-Sébastien Tremblay-Roy, Alexandra Lamontagne, Claude Cyr

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFamily centered careMedicineFamily medicineHealth professionalsNursingHealth careDescriptive statistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transport of a critically ill child is a stressful event for both the parent and the awake patient. Parental accompaniment during transport is considered a core quality metrics in pediatric transport, and a key measure of family-centered care in this setting. However, parental presence during inter-hospital transport is not commonplace in Quebec. The aim of this study is to evaluate the opinion of different actors (parents, children and health care professionals) of the specialised pediatric transport system of our tertiary care pediatric center on parental presence in transport and to identify the perceived benefits, disadvantages and barriers to its practice. This is a questionnaire-based descriptive cross-sectional study. Health care professionals qualified to participate in our pediatric transport team and parents of hospitalized children were interviewed using two self-administered surveys developed from previously published family-centered care questionnaires. Hospitalized children from age 5 to 17 were also interviewed with a short verbal semi-structured questionnaire using sentence completion and assessed by content analysis methodology. A total of 95 professionals (26 physicians, 19 nurses, 11 respiratory therapists and 37 paramedics), 65 parents and 25 children completed the surveys between February and August 2017. All of the parents (100%) and 79% of health care professionals thought that parents should have the possibility to be present with their child during interfacility transport. Both parents and health care providers perceived parental presence to be beneficial for the child (98% of parents, 91% of professionals) and for the parent (100% of parents, 74% of professionals). However, both groups foresaw some disadvantages and some barriers to its practice. Of those, lack of space in the ambulance seems to be an important issue. The majority of children (84%) think that it would be important for them to be accompanied by their parent if they needed interfacility transport. All of the parents and the majority of health care providers and children interviewed think that parents should be able to be present with their child during interfacility transport. While the majority of responders perceive parental presence as beneficial for the child and his parent, some disadvantages and barriers are identified and should be addressed if a practice change towards parental accompaniment is undertaken.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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