MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193141530 · doi:10.1016/j.pedneo.2021.06.014

Pandemic planning: Developing a triage framework for Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

2021· review· en· W3193141530 on OpenAlexafffund
Thierry Daboval, Connie Williams, Susan Albersheim

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatrics & Neonatology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCHEO Research Institute
KeywordsTriageMedicinePandemicNeonatal intensive care unitMedical emergencyH1n1 pandemicIntensive careDistressIntensive care medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Intensive care unitDiseasePediatricsInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the Covid-19 pandemic has not had a direct impact on neonates so far, it has raised concerns about resource distribution and showed that planning is required before the next crisis or pandemic. Resource allocation must consider unique Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) attributes, including physical space and equipment that may not be transferable to older populations, unique skills of NICU staff, inherent uncertainty in prognosis both antenatally and postnatally, possible biases against neonates, and the future pandemic disease's possible impact on neonates. We identified the need for a validated Neonatal Severity of Illness Prognostic Score to guide triage decisions. Based on this score, triage decisions are the responsibility of an informed triage team not involved in direct patient care. Support for the distress experienced by parents and staff is needed. This paper presents essential considerations in developing a practical framework for resources and triage in the NICU before, during and after a pandemic.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatrics & NeonatologySame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207