MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306165863 · doi:10.1007/s00431-022-04636-z

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) protocol for systematic assessment of the crashing neonate—expert consensus statement of the international crashing neonate working group

2022· article· en· W4306165863 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Pediatrics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity of OttawaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)Delphi methodIntensive care medicineNeonatal intensive care unitResuscitationClinical PracticeNeonatal resuscitationIntensive carePoint of care ultrasoundMedical emergencyPediatricsEmergency medicinePhysical therapyAlternative medicineEmergency departmentNursingPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudden unexpected clinical deterioration or cardiorespiratory instability is common in neonates and is often referred as a "crashing" neonate. The established resuscitation guidelines provide an excellent framework to stabilize and evaluate these infants, but it is primarily based upon clinical assessment only. However, clinical assessment in sick neonates is limited in identifying underlying pathophysiology. The Crashing Neonate Protocol (CNP), utilizing point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS), is specifically designed for use in neonatal emergencies. It can be applied both in term and pre-term neonates in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The proposed protocol involves a stepwise systematic assessment with basic ultrasound views which can be easily learnt and reproduced with focused structured training on the use of portable ultrasonography (similar to the FAST and BLUE protocols in adult clinical practice). We conducted a literature review of the evidence-based use of POCUS in neonatal practice. We then applied stepwise voting process with a modified DELPHI strategy (electronic voting) utilizing an international expert group to prioritize recommendations. We also conducted an international survey among a group of neonatologists practicing POCUS. The lead expert authors identified a specific list of recommendations to be included in the proposed CNP. This protocol involves pre-defined steps focused on identifying the underlying etiology of clinical instability and assessing the response to intervention.Conclusion: To conclude, the newly proposed POCUS-based CNP should be used as an adjunct to the current recommendations for neonatal resuscitation and not replace them, especially in infants unresponsive to standard resuscitation steps, or where the underlying cause of deterioration remains unclear. What is known? • Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is helpful in evaluation of the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms in sick infants. What is new? • The Crashing Neonate Protocol (CNP) is proposed as an adjunct to the current recommendations for neonatal resuscitation, with pre-defined steps focused on gaining information regarding the underlying pathophysiology in unexplained "crashing" neonates. • The proposed CNP can help in targeting specific and early therapy based upon the underlying pathophysiology, and it allows assessment of the response to intervention(s) in a timely fashion.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.317 · 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