MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3073148409 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxaa068.000

1 Paediatric Transport Safety Collaborative (PTSIC): Critical Events with Family Presence During Paediatric Critical Care Transport

2020· article· en· W3073148409 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aaisham Ali, Michael Miller, Saoirse Cameron, Anna Gunz

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePatient safetyEmergency medicinePediatricsIntensive care medicineHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Health care of children in Canada is regionalized; thus, critically ill paediatric patients require transfer to a tertiary care centre for definitive medical and surgical management. There are risks inherent to transporting critically ill patients, and there is a body of literature looking to mitigate risk, which includes tracking and benchmarking quality metrics. One accepted metric is family accompaniment of a child during transport, with some studies suggesting that family accompaniment could compromise care. Currently, there has been no research that examines patient safety and outcomes during paediatric critical care transport with family presence. Objectives The primary objective of this study was to compare the rate of critical events (CEs) during the transport of paediatric patients by a specialized paediatric critical care transport team on transports with parental/caregiver accompaniment (P/CA) to those without P/CA. Secondary objectives included whether peak heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and clinically relevant patient outcomes varied between groups. Design/Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all patients (<18 years old) who were admitted to a Paediatric Critical Care Unit and transported by the local neonatal paediatric transport team between April 1st, 2018 and June 1st, 2019, inclusive. The primary outcome was CE occurrence using the composite definition of CE that was previously identified and defined by a national consensus process, which included patient-, transport provider-, laboratory- and system/vehicle- related safety factors. Secondary outcomes included peak and trough HR/SBP, and clinically relevant outcomes (including length of stay, mechanical ventilation free days, and severity of illness and organ dysfunction scores). Results There were a total of 178 transports eligible for analysis, and of those, 55 were with P/CA and 123 were without P/CA. The occurrence of CE was not significantly different between transports with and without P/CA (66% vs. 65%, respectively). Similarly, patient HR, SBP, and all measured clinical patient outcomes did not vary significantly between groups. Conclusion This study is the first to objectively measure CEs and relate them to patient clinical outcomes with regard to presence of P/CA during paediatric critical care transport. There was no identified increased risk to the patient or crew if parents/caregivers accompanied their child during transport. Areas of future study include whether parental/caregiver presence during transport affects patient anxiety and well-being.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies→French-language works237,207→