Evaluating and Enhancing the Preparation of Patients and Families before Pediatric Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surgery can be a difficult and unfamiliar experience for children and their families. We examined the ability of existing information to help families feel better prepared for surgery at the Alberta Children's Hospital (ACH) and evaluated the best way to enhance its content and accessibility. We developed an online survey for families who have had surgery at ACH. Participants were recruited through pre-existing patient networks and from the ACH Short Stay Unit (SSU) between October 2018 and October 2019. The survey asked participants to evaluate the information available to prepare them for surgery and requested suggestions for improvement. Our survey results show that those who completed the in-person Surgery 101 program felt significantly more prepared for surgery. Of those who did not attend; 40% would have been interested in participating but were unaware that the program existed; and 17% planned to attend but were unable to; due to work or travel distance. Participants felt additional resources via online content or paper handouts would be most valuable. We used this information to prepare an online accessible summary of the Surgery 101 program and tour in the form of a video to reach more Albertan families preparing for surgery for their children.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".