Chinese Neonatal Network: a national protocol for collaborative research and quality improvement in neonatal care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The objective of the Chinese Neonatal Network (CHNN) is to provide a platform for collaborative research, outcomes evaluation and quality improvement for preterm infants with gestational age less than 32 weeks in China. The CHNN is the first national neonatal network and has the largest geographically representative cohort from neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in China. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Individual-level data from participating NICUs will be collected using a unique database developed by the CHNN on an ongoing basis from January 2019. Data will be prospectively collected from all infants <32 weeks gestation or <1500 g birth weight at 58 participating NICUs. Infant outcomes and inter-institutional variations in outcomes will be examined and used to inform quality improvement measures aimed at improving outcomes. Information about NICU environmental and human resource factors and processes of neonatal care will also be collected and analysed for association with outcomes. Clinical studies, including randomised controlled trials will be conducted using the CHNN data platform. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was approved by the ethics review board of Children's Hospital of Fudan University, which was recognised by all participating hospitals. Waiver of consent were granted at all sites. Only non-identifiable patient level data will be transmitted and only aggregate data will be reported in CHNN reports and publications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".