Developmental Care of Premature Newborns: A Success Story from Evidence-based Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nursing is useful to the society through the efforts to prevent health problems and through the care, the support and the comfort it provides to the public. In addition, nursing contributes to the advancement of knowledge about experiences of health and illness. Indeed, from the phenomena at the field experience, theoretical work and research in human health play a role in the development of the discipline and the nursing profession. The importance of research for nursing is particularly evident in a context in which evidence-based practice is being promoted, an unavoidable reality in the health field. However, research results do not translate so easily into practice, and it is often argued that there is a gap between the availability of research results and professional practice. Filling this gap cannot depend solely on the world of research and the availability of evidence. It also considers the practice environment and its ability to take into account the available results. This article aims at clarifying the link between the status of discipline, the nursing profession and care in order to establish the need for a better link between knowledge, research and the practice of nursing. It also seeks to briefly recall how knowledge and research contribute to the advancement of a discipline while having the potential and the power to improve practice. More specifically, an example of evidence will highlight how research findings can influence practice and care, outlining briefly how research on investigating the effect of variation in light and noise in neonatal departments in West especially in USA, Canada, Australia, France, etc, have improved the practice of nursing and how nursing theories can contribute not only to the advancement of nursing discipline, but also to the improvement of the provided cares. Levine's conservation model and the theory of promoting pre-term infant health served as a theoretical framework for experimentation to improve the practice of caring for pre-term infants, hence the obligation for nursing staff to pay attention to them and try to integrate them into their interventions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.080 | 0.155 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.026 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".