MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080296592 · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1715524

Evaluation of a Modified SBAR Report to Physician Tool to Standardize Communication on Neonatal Transport

2020· article· en· W3080296592 on OpenAlexaffabout
Shaneela Shahid, Lehana Thabane, Michael Marrin, Karen Schattauer, Laurel Silenzi, Sayem Borhan, Balpreet Singh, Cherian Thomas, Sumesh Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Perinatology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of CalgarySt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMultidisciplinary approachConfidence intervalQuality managementHealth carePatient safetyMEDLINEMedical emergencyIntervention (counseling)Emergency medicineFamily medicineNursingService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: SBAR (situation, background, assessment and recommendation) is a structured format for the effective communication of critically relevant information. This tool was developed as a generic template to provide structure to the communication of clinical information between health care providers. Neonatal transport often presents clinically stressful circumstances where concise and accurate information is required to be shared clearly between multidisciplinary health care providers. A modified SBAR communication tool was designed to facilitate structured communication between nonphysician bedside care providers operating from remote sites and physicians providing decision-making support at receiving care facilities. Prospective interventional study was designed to evaluate the reliability of a "SBAR report to physician tool" in sharing clinically relevant information between multidisciplinary care providers on neonatal transport. STUDY DESIGN: The study was conducted between 2011 and 2014 by a dedicated neonatal transport service based at McMaster Children's Hospital which provides care for approximately 500 infants in Southern Ontario annually. In the preintervention phase, 50 calls were randomly selected for the evaluation and 115 consecutively recorded transport calls following adoption of the reporting tool. The quality of calls prior to and after the intervention was assessed by reviewers independently. Inter-rater agreement was also assessed for both periods. RESULTS: < 0.001) in postintervention period. CONCLUSION: The use of the SBAR report to physician tool improved the quality of clinical information shared between nonphysician members of the neonatal transport team and neonatal transport physicians. KEY POINTS: · Long-Accurate and concise information sharing is crucial for decision-making in neonatal transport.. · Information sharing between multidisciplinary teams can be enhanced by using a commonly understood information sharing template.. · The SBAR report to physician tool improves the quality of information shared between multidisciplinary team members in neonatal transport..

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)0.073
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.158
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 score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0730.158
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PerinatologySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207