Assessing Safety Status of Pediatric Intensive Care Units of Tehran, Iran according to the World Health Organization’s Safety Standards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Given that children in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) are more vulnerable to safety risks, health care officials are required to identify the weaknesses and strengths of care and ensure the safety of these children. In this study, the safety status in PICUs of selected educational children’s hospitals in Tehran, Iran, was examined and compared with standards proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO). Methods: In this descriptive study, the performance of nurses with a bachelor’s degree or higher and minimum work experience of six months in the PICU was examined. The study environment included four selected educational hospitals located in Tehran, Iran. Data collection tools were eight safety observation checklists based on the safety standards of WHO. Data collection took five months and the nurses’ performance was categorized into three groups of undesirable, relatively desirable, and desirable. The data were analyzed using SPSS software version 13, descriptive statistics, and regression analysis. Results: Consistency of nursing care for the safety of hospitalized children was found undesirable in hand hygiene in accordance with the WHO standards. Nurses’ performance was relatively desirable in the fields of being more cautious about drugs with similar names or spelling to avoid medication errors, communication during patient hand-over, and performance of correct procedure at correct body site. Regarding other fields, the consistency was at a desirable level. Conclusion: Children’s safety in the PICUs is not desirable in terms of observing health codes and there is a long way to go to meet the international standards.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".