MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224255213 · doi:10.1097/anc.0000000000000996

Elevated Sound Levels in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit

2022· article· en· W4224255213 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Neonatal Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfant Development and Preterm Care
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioOttawa Hospital
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsSound (geography)Neonatal intensive care unitIntensive care unitFocus (optics)Unit (ring theory)Intensive careMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Premature and sick neonates may require weeks of hospitalization in a noisy neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) environment with sound levels that may reach 120 decibels. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends a maximum sound level of 45 decibels. PURPOSE: To measure sound levels in a level III NICU and to describe contributing environmental factors. METHODS: Descriptive quantitative study. Sound levels were measured using a portable sound meter in an open-bay level III NICU. Contributing environmental factors were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Mean sound levels for day, evening, and night shifts were 83.5, 83, and 80.9 decibels, respectively. Each period of time exceeded the recommended guidelines 90% of the time and was almost double the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendation. Multiple linear regression findings demonstrated significant factors associated with elevated sound levels including number of neonates, number of people, number of alarms, acuity level, and shift type. Observational data explain 14.5% of elevated sound levels. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: An understanding of baseline sound levels and contributing environmental factors is the first step in developing strategies to mitigate excessive noise in the NICU. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Research should focus on effective and sustainable ways to reduce sound levels in the NICU, including inside the isolette, in order to provide an environment that is conducive to optimal growth and neurodevelopment for preterm and sick infants.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Neonatal CareSame topicInfant Development and Preterm CareFrench-language works237,207