Specialized Pediatric Palliative Care in Neonates with Life-Limiting Illness: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the impact of specialized pediatric palliative care (PPC) on neonates with life-limiting conditions compared to standard care. STUDY DESIGN: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, and Embase databases were searched from January 2000 to September 2018. Randomized clinical trials, experimental or observational studies, and secondary administrative database analyses published in English, Spanish, French, and German were included. Two independent reviewers extracted data, and used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for quality analysis. Discrepancies were resolved as a team. RESULTS: From the 37,788 records obtained, only eight articles met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis was not possible due to the heterogeneity in how the outcomes were defined; however, a qualitative synthesis of the results was possible; organizing outcomes into eight different categories: psychological, social and spiritual support; communication; location of care; symptom management; bereavement care; predicted versus actual neonatal outcomes; and parental coping, stress, and satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Specialized versus may have an impact on neonates with life-limiting conditions and their families. More studies that evaluate the impact of specialized versus in neonates with sound statistical analysis is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".