MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303986519 · doi:10.1186/s12245-022-00462-0

Evaluation of baseline pediatric readiness of emergency departments in Manitoba, Canada

2022· article· en· W4303986519 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alex Aregbesola, O Florescu, Clara Tam, Amanda C. Coyle, Lisa Knisley, Kaitlin Hogue, Darcy Beer, Scott Sawyer, Terry P. Klassen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of ManitobaChildren's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba
FundersChildren’s Hospital Foundation of ManitobaChildren's Hospital FoundationManitoba Medical Service Foundation
KeywordsMedicineBaseline (sea)Medical emergencyAngiologyFamily medicineEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Data on the readiness of the general emergency departments (EDs) in Canada to care for children requiring emergency care are limited. Recent evidence suggests an inverse association between pediatric readiness of the general ED and mortality. OBJECTIVES: To assess the baseline pediatric readiness of the general EDs in the province of Manitoba, Canada, to care for acutely ill and injured children. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey study conducted between 2019 and 2020. We used a validated pediatric readiness research checklist to obtain information on the six domains of the general EDs in Manitoba in the fiscal year 2019. A general ED that managed acutely ill patients (0-17th birthday), except for psychiatric cases (up to the 18th birthday), was defined as eligible. We performed a descriptive analysis using the weighted pediatric readiness score (WPRS) based on a 100-point scale. The factors associated with the total WPRS were examined in linear regression models. RESULTS: Of the 42 eligible general EDs, 34 centers participated with a participation rate of 81%. However, only 27 general EDs plus one specialized children ED (28, 67%) completed the survey. The overall median WPRS (/100) attained by the general EDs was 52.34 (interquartile range [IQR] = 10.44). The only specialized children ED in Manitoba achieved a score of 89.75. Over half (15, 55.6%) of the general EDs scored 50 or more. The mean volume of the general ED that participated was 4010.9 (± SD 2137.2) pediatric general ED visits/year. The average scores attained in the domains such as coordination of patient care, general ED staffing and training, and quality improvement were low across the five Regional Health Authorities. The general ED volume was directly associated with the total WPRS, regression coefficient, β = 0.24 (95% CI 0.04-0.44). Neither the capacity of the general ED to receive pediatric patients from a nursing station, β = - 0.07 (95% CI - 0.28-0.14), nor the capacity to admit pediatric patients that visited the general ED, β = - 0.03 (- 0.23-0.17) was associated with the total WPRS. CONCLUSIONS: The pediatric readiness of the general EDs across Manitoba is comparable to other Canadian region, yet some domains need to be improved.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Emergency MedicineSame topicEmergency and Acute Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207