The Fundamental Need for Sleep in Neurocritical Care Units: Time for a Paradigm Shift
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intensive neurological assessments in neurocritical care settings for unduly prolonged period result in profound sleep deprivation in those patients that confounds the true neurological status of these patients, and the mounting apprehension in providers can beget a vicious cycle of even more intensive neurological assessments resulting in further sleep deprivation from being constantly woken up to be "assessed." This iatrogenic state drives these patients into deep sleep stages that impact spontaneous breathing trials, weaken immunity, and lead to unwarranted investigations and interventions. There is dwindling value of prolonged frequent neurochecks beyond the initial 24-48 h of an intracranial event. We insist that sleep must be considered on at least an equal par to other functions that are routinely assessed. We reason that therapeutic sleep must be allowed to these patients in suitable amounts especially beyond the first 36-48 h to achieve ideal and swift recovery. This merits a paradigm shift.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".