MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997010081

Management of neonatal jaundice in primary care.

2016· article· en· W2997010081 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsKellogg's (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChecklistJaundiceCritical appraisalReferralChristian ministryIntensive care medicineMultidisciplinary approachMEDLINEPrimary carePediatricsAlternative medicineFamily medicineSurgery
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Clinical Practice Guidelines on Management of Neonatal Jaundice 2003 was updated by a multidisciplinary development group and approved by the Ministry of Health Malaysia in 2014. A systematic review of 13 clinical questions was conducted using evidence retrieved mainly from Medline and Cochrane databases. Critical appraisal was done using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Recommendations were formulated based on the accepted 103 evidences and tailored to local setting as stated below. Neonatal jaundice (NNJ) is a common condition seen in primary care. Multiple risk factors contribute to severe NNJ, which if untreated can lead to adverse neurological outcomes. Visual assessment, transcutaneous bilirubinometer (TcB) and total serum bilirubin (TSB) are the methods used for the detection of NNJ. Phototherapy remains the mainstay of the treatment. Babies with severe NNJ should be followed-up to detect and manage sequelae. Strategies to prevent severe NNJ include health education, identification of risk factors, proper assessment and early referral.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.219 · 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