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 OpenAlexaff
Yasser Elsayed, Muzafar Gani Abdul Wahab, Adel Mohamed, Nadya Ben Fadel, Shazia Bhombal, Nadya Yousef, María V. Fraga, Jehier Afifi, Pradeep Suryawanshi, Abbas Hyderi, Anup Katheria, Martin Kluckow, Danièle De Luca, Yogen Singh

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.

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)0.156
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.147
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1560.147
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations36
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of PediatricsSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207