MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046801207 · doi:10.1111/pan.13981

A systematic review of outcomes reported in pediatric perioperative research: A report from the Pediatric Perioperative Outcomes Group

2020· review· en· W3046801207 on OpenAlexaff
Wallis T. Muhly, Elsa Taylor, Cyrus Razavi, Suellen M. Walker, Yang Lei, Jurgen C. de Graaff, László Vutskits, Andrew Davidson, Yunxia Zuo, Carolina Pérez‐Pradilla, Piedad Echeverry, Alexandra Torborg, Ting Xu, Ellen Rawlinson, Rajeev Subramanyam, Simon D. Whyte, Ruth L. Seal, Heidi M. Meyer, Sandhya Yaddanapudi, Susan M. Goobie, Joseph P. Cravero, Aideen Keaney, M. Ruth Graham, Tania Ramos, Paul A. Stricker

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Anesthesia · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of AlbertaBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersGreat Ormond Street Hospital Charity
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeSubspecialtyPediatricsAnesthesiologyPopulationClinical trialMEDLINEIntensive care medicineEmergency medicineAnesthesiaFamily medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Pediatric Perioperative Outcomes Group (PPOG) is an international collaborative of clinical investigators and clinicians within the subspecialty of pediatric anesthesiology and perioperative care which aims to use COMET (Core Outcomes Measures in Effectiveness Trials) methodology to develop core outcome setsfor infants, children and young people that are tailored to the priorities of the pediatric surgical population.Focusing on four age-dependent patient subpopulations determined a priori for core outcome set development: i) neonates and former preterm infants (up to 60 weeks postmenstrual age); ii) infants (>60 weeks postmenstrual age - <1 year); iii) toddlers and school age children (>1-<13 years); and iv) adolescents (>13-<18 years), we conducted a systematic review of outcomes reported in perioperative studies that include participants within age-dependent pediatric subpopulations. Our review of pediatric perioperative controlled trials published from 2008 to 2018 identified 724 articles reporting 3192 outcome measures. The proportion of published trials and the most frequently reported outcomes varied across pre-determined age groups. Outcomes related to patient comfort, particularly pain and analgesic requirement, were the most frequent domain for infants, children and adolescents. Clinical indicators, particularly cardiorespiratory or medication-related adverse events, were the most common outcomes for neonates and infants < 60 weeks and were the second most frequent domain at all other ages. Neonates and infants <60 weeks of age were significantly under-represented in perioperative trials. Patient-centered outcomes, heath care utilization, and bleeding/transfusion related outcomes were less often reported. In most studies, outcomes were measured in the immediate perioperative period, with the duration often restricted to the post-anesthesia care unit or the first 24 postoperative hours. The outcomes identified with this systematic review will be combined with patient centered outcomes identified through a subsequent stakeholder engagement study to arrive at a core outcome set for each age-specific group.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.140
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reporting · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.151

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.140
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.010
Bibliometrics0.0240.029
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
DomainReporting
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric AnesthesiaSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207