Goals of Parents Whose Infant Is in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of many neonatal intensive care units (NICU) today is to promote a family-centered practice that addresses parental concerns and needs. However, the specific goals of parents are often unaddressed by the healthcare team. The aim of this study was to understand the goals of parents whose infant was in the NICU to enhance collaboration and communication between parents and health professionals. METHODS: A written questionnaire was disseminated to parents whose infant was in the NICU at the Kingston Health Sciences Centre. A thematic analysis of the goals was completed to identify key emergent themes and their implications. RESULTS: A total of 23 questionnaires were disseminated to parents and 13 (57%) were returned. Returned questionnaires were most often completed by the mother (n = 9, 70%), and a total of 40 goals were recorded. Three key emergent themes were identified, which included feeding and weight gain, eliminating medical equipment, and successful hospital discharge. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Understanding the goals of parents whose infant was in the NICU can enhance communication between parents and their healthcare team, thus aiding the implementation of a family-centered practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Future larger sample sizes studies across several NICUs would increase the generalizability of results and garner a larger volume of data to establish significant trends between specific infant and parent demographic data and the associated goals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".