MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225314453 · doi:10.1097/pec.0000000000002561

Pediatric Transport Safety Collaborative

2021· article· en· W4225314453 on OpenAlexaffabout
Aaisham Ali, Michael R. Miller, Saoirse Cameron, Anna Gunz

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Emergency Care · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
Canadian institutionsChildren’s Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectPatient safetyPediatric intensive care unitEmergency medicineRetrospective cohort studyPediatricsPediatric hospitalMEDLINEHealth careFamily medicineSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives In Canada, critically ill pediatric patients require transfer to a tertiary care center for definitive medical and surgical management. Some studies suggest that family accompaniment could compromise care; currently, limited research has examined patient safety and outcomes during pediatric critical care transport with family presence, and no Canada-specific data currently exists. The primary objective of this study was to compare the rate of adverse events during the transport of pediatric patients by a specialized pediatric critical care transport team with parental accompaniment to those without parental accompaniment. Secondary objectives included whether geographic or patient-specific factors affected rates of parental accompaniment and if parental presence during transport was related to patient outcomes. Methods Retrospective cohort study in a pediatric critical care unit convenience sample at an academic children's hospital. Inclusion criteria constituted all patients younger than 18 years who were admitted to the pediatric critical care unit after interfacility transport by the London Health Sciences Center Neonatal Pediatric Transport Team between April 1, 2018, and April 30, 2020, inclusive. Adverse event rates, patient characteristics, and clinical outcomes were compared. Results There were 357 transports eligible for analysis. Of these, there were 180 transports with, and 177 without, parental accompaniment. The primary outcome was adverse event occurrence using the composite definition of adverse events, previously defined by a Canadian consensus process, which included patient-, transport provider-, laboratory-, and system/vehicle-related safety factors. The occurrence of adverse events was not significantly different between transports with and without parental accompaniment, 49.4% and 54.8%, respectively (odds ratio, 0.80; P = 0.311). Conclusions This is the first study to compare the effect on adverse event rate and clinically relevant outcomes between transports with and without parental presence during interfacility pediatric critical care transport. Our study found no significant difference in the adverse event rate between transports with and without parental presence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.325 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Emergency CareSame topicFamily and Patient Care in Intensive Care UnitsFrench-language works237,207