Barriers and enablers to the development and implementation of early mobility programs for children in the pediatric intensive care unit: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to gather and map the current literature associated with barriers and enablers related to the development and implementation of an early mobility program in pediatric intensive care units. INTRODUCTION: As care for critically ill patients has evolved, strategies to optimize patient outcomes and reduce the side effects of treatment have become a rising priority for clinicians, patients, and their families. Early mobilization of patients with critical illness is the only evidence-based intervention that decreases intensive care unit-acquired weakness; it may also minimize intensive care unit-acquired delirium. Early mobility in the pediatric setting has many obstacles, and routine uptake of early mobility practice has lagged. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider literature related to the barriers and enablers to the development and/or implementation of early mobility programs in pediatric intensive care units. The review will target programs designed for children and youth from birth to 18 years who have been admitted to a pediatric intensive care unit. METHODS: This scoping review will search six databases and several sources of unpublished/gray literature. Studies published in English and French will be included. The search will be restricted to publications after 1980. Data will be extracted using a tool developed by the reviewers. The data extracted will be presented in a tabular manner and highlight the key findings related to the objectives of this review.
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 | 0.021 |
| 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".