Thermoregulation and golden hour practices in extremely preterm infants: an international survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Are thermoregulation and golden hour practices in extremely preterm (EP) infants comparable across the world? This study aims to describe these practices for EP infants based on the neonatal intensive care unit's (NICUs) geographic region, country's income status and the lowest gestational age (GA) of infants resuscitated. METHODS: The Director of each NICU was requested to complete the e-questionnaire between February 2019 and August 2021. RESULTS: We received 848 responses, from all geographic regions and resource settings. Variations in most thermoregulation and golden hour practices were observed. Using a polyethylene plastic wrap, commencing humidity within 60 min of admission, and having local protocols were the most consistent practices (>75%). The odds for the following practices differed in NICUs resuscitating infants from 22 to 23 weeks GA compared to those resuscitating from 24 to 25 weeks: respiratory support during resuscitation and transport, use of polyethylene plastic wrap and servo-control mode, commencing ambient humidity >80% and presence of local protocols. CONCLUSION: Evidence-based practices on thermoregulation and golden hour stabilisation differed based on the unit's region, country's income status and the lowest GA of infants resuscitated. Future efforts should address reducing variation in practice and aligning practices with international guidelines. IMPACT: A wide variation in thermoregulation and golden hour practices exists depending on the income status, geographic region and lowest gestation age of infants resuscitated. Using a polyethylene plastic wrap, commencing humidity within 60 min of admission and having local protocols were the most consistent practices. This study provides a comprehensive description of thermoregulation and golden hour practices to allow a global comparison in the delivery of best evidence-based practice. The findings of this survey highlight a need for reducing variation in practice and aligning practices with international guidelines for a comparable health care delivery.
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 | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".