MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3208457640 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxab061.060

75 Parental perspective about the health and development of their extremely preterm child

2021· article· en· W3208457640 on OpenAlexaffabout
Audrey‐Anne Milette, Lindsay L. Richter, Claude Julie Bourque, Annie Janvier, Kate Robson, Paige Therrien Church, Anne Synnes, Thuy Mai Luu

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineSunnybrook Health Science CentreHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsGestational ageCohortPerspective (graphical)Child developmentChild healthPregnancyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Primary Subject area Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine Background Preterm birth outcome studies and clinical follow-up have traditionally focused on neurodevelopment. We previously showed in a selected sample of parents that they also valued other types of outcomes. Objectives This study aimed to validate these findings in a more diverse cohort by examining parental perspectives about the positive and negative aspects of their very preterm child’s health and development in relation to level of neurodevelopment impairment (NDI). Design/Methods Parents of children born < 29 weeks gestational age in 2016-2018 and seen at two Canadian neonatal follow-up clinics were invited to complete an online survey about their level of agreement with statements about their child’s health, development, and well-being. Parental responses in relation to their child’s level of NDI were examined using Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square for trends tests. Results 199 parental responses were obtained for 165 children (65% of eligible children). Of these children, 52%, 27% and 21% had, respectively, no, mild to moderate, and severe NDI. Development was the most common source of concerns (49%), followed by the child’s future (35%), and physical health (35%). Parents of children with severe NDI were more likely to express concerns than those with mild to moderate or no NDI. Parents rated their child’s health relatively high with a median score of 8/10 (range 3-10). Children with no NDI were given higher scores than those with NDI (p = 0.004). Regardless of level of NDI, almost all parents agreed with their child being happy (p = 1.000) and having a positive personality (p = 0.207). Figure 1 shows that parental concerns increased with level of NDI. Conclusion Parents of preterm children have a balanced perspective on their child’s outcome. Integrating their views when developing core sets of important outcomes for neonatal follow-up is critical.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicInfant Development and Preterm Care→French-language works237,207→