MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987850053 · doi:10.12968/bjom.2019.27.11.716

Neonatal resuscitation: ‘room side to motherside’

2019· article· en· W2987850053 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Stamoulos, Rachel Lavelle

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Midwifery · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUmbilical cordCord clampingResuscitationMedicineNeonatal resuscitationCordIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaObstetricsSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delayed clamping of the neonatal umbilical cord is considered beneficial to the transition to extrauterine life in a term, uncomplicated birth. However, some neonates require resuscitation and the ability to perform this is a fundamental aspect of midwifery practice. The decision to clamp and cut the umbilical cord often precludes any resuscitative attempt, but the reasoning for this action is unclear. This article explores the purpose and place of leaving the umbilical cord intact during neonatal resuscitation. It considers the physiological basis for delaying cord clamping as well as the psychological benefits to baby, mother and family of leaving the cord intact until resuscitation is complete.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.829

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of MidwiferySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207