Coached, Coordinated, Enhanced Neonatal Transition (CCENT): protocol for a multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled trial of transition-to-home support for parents of high-risk infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Having an infant admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) is associated with increased parental stress, anxiety and depression. Enhanced support for parents may decrease parental stress and improve subsequent parent and child outcomes. The Coached, Coordinated, Enhanced Neonatal Transition (CCENT) programme is a novel bundled intervention of psychosocial support delivered by a nurse navigator that includes Acceptance and Commitment Therapy-based coaching, care coordination and anticipatory education for parents of high-risk infants in the NICU through the first year at home. The primary objective is to evaluate the impact of the intervention on parent stress at 12 months. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled superiority trial with 1:1 allocation to the CCENT model versus control (standard neonatal follow-up). Parents of high-risk infants (n=236) will be recruited from seven NICUs across three Canadian provinces. Intervention participants are assigned a nurse navigator who will provide the intervention for 12 months. Outcomes are measured at baseline, 6 weeks, 4, 12 and 18 months. The primary outcome measure is the total score of the Parenting Stress Index Fourth Edition Short Form at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include parental mental health, empowerment and health-related quality of life for calculation of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). A cost-effectiveness analysis will examine the incremental cost of CCENT versus usual care per QALY gained. Qualitative interviews will explore parent and healthcare provider experiences with the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics approval was obtained from Clinical Trials Ontario, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Ethics Board (REB), The Hospital for Sick Children REB, UBC Children's and Women's REB and McGill University Health Centre REB. Results will be shared with Canadian level III NICUs, neonatal follow-up programmes and academic forums. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03350243).
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 | 0.031 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.010 |
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".