MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015305489 · doi:10.1590/0034-7167-2018-0793

Factors associated with the discontinuance of outpatient follow-up in neonatal units

2020· article· en· W3015305489 on OpenAlexaff
Elysângela Dittz Duarte, Tatiana Silva Tavares, Isadora Virgínia Leopoldino Cardoso, Carolina Santiago Vieira, Bárbara Radieddine Guimarães, Mariana Bueno

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Brasileira de Enfermagem · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttendanceMedicineNeonatal intensive care unitDepression (economics)Mechanical ventilationOutpatient clinicLogistic regressionSocial supportEmergency medicineFamily medicinePediatricsPsychiatryPsychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: to identify predisposing and enabling factors as well as the health needs associated with the discontinuance of outpatient follow-up of newborns who were hospitalized at neonatal intensive care unit. METHODS: cross-sectional study, using the behavioral model of health services use. The study was composed of 358 mothers and newborns referred to the outpatient follow-up after discharge. Characterization, perception of social support, postnatal depression, and attendance to appointments data were collected, analyzed by the R software (3.3.1). RESULTS: outpatient follow-up was discontinued by 31.28% of children in the first year after discharge. In multiple regression analysis, the chance of discontinuance was higher for newborns who used mechanical ventilation (OR = 1.68; 95%CI 1.04-2.72) and depended on technology (OR = 3.54; 95%CI 1.32-9.5). CONCLUSIONS: predisposing factors were associated with the discontinuance of follow-up; enabling factors and health needs did not present a significant association. Children with more complex health conditions require additional support to participate in follow-up programs, thus ensuring the continuity of care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Brasileira de EnfermagemSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207