Outcomes associated with family presence at the bedside of critically ill children in the pediatric intensive care unit: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to identify the outcomes of family presence at the bedside of critically ill children in pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) that have been reported in the literature. INTRODUCTION: PICU admission is traumatic for critically ill children and their family members, and family presence may alleviate negative outcomes. Family presence may change with family member, patient, health care provider, and institutional circumstances. Prior to designing studies to assess the outcomes of family presence at the bedside, or to conducting a systematic review of the literature, a scoping review is needed to systematically identify and map the outcomes for stakeholders. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will include literature addressing outcomes of family presence at the bedside in the PICU on the patient, family members, and health care providers. Emotional, social, psychological, and physiological outcomes will be considered, including outcomes on the provision of PICU care. METHODS: A systematic search will be undertaken across four databases and several sources of gray literature. The review will not be restricted by language, and will be limited to sources published after 1960. The search strategy was designed using text words from titles and abstracts of relevant studies. Title and abstract screening, followed by full text assessment of sources against inclusion criteria, will be completed in duplicate. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers using a data extraction tool developed by the study team. Data will be presented in tabular format to address findings related to the review objectives.
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 | 0.081 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.006 |
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".