MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4249756205 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2019.146

P.046 Increasing EEG monitoring in the pediatric ICU - benefits and barriers

2019· article· en· W4249756205 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J Ghossein, F Alnaji, D Pohl

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyCritically illMentorshipIntensive care medicineElectroencephalographyMedical recordEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Non-convulsive seizures are common in critically ill patients and are best detected by continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring. A recent consensus statement from the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society (ACNS) outlines the indications for EEG monitoring in critically ill patients. Our aim was to assess adherence to these indications, barriers to cEEG utilization as well as to optimize cEEG monitoring in critically ill children. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of electronic medical records, analyzing patients admitted to the PICU from January 1st until June 23rd 2018, followed by an 8-week mentorship period, consisting of educational interventions as well as daily patient rounds to help identify patients meeting cEEG monitoring criteria. Results: Prevalence of patients meeting cEEG monitoring indications were similar in both the retrospective and mentorship period (18% vs. 23%). During the retrospective period, 23% of patients received cEEG monitoring, reaching 100% at the end of the mentorship period. The median delay for initiation of monitoring was 17 hours, largely due to restrictions in the availability of technologists. All cEEGs performed informed anti-convulsive management. Conclusions: An educational intervention was effective in increasing PICU cEEG monitoring. However, limited hours of technologist availability represented the largest barrier to timely cEEG monitoring.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology→French-language works237,207→