Canadian Pediatric Intensive Care Adaptations for Critically Ill Adults During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Survey Study (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed Canadian hospitals with adult admissions. A large number of adult patients required critical care therapies, placing significant strain on hospital resources. In order to decompress adult intensive care units, pediatric intensive care units (PICUs) introduced adapted models of traditional care to lessen these burdens. OBJECTIVE We aimed to evaluate how PICUs across Canada adapted care for the high volumes of critically ill adults. METHODS A survey containing 40 questions was sent to the medical directors of 14 Canadian PICUs where English was the primary clinical language. The survey was designed to gain perspective on the various adaptations that PICUs instituted during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS Of the 13 PICUs that returned survey responses (response rate: 13/14, 93%), 10 (77%) participated in at least one adaptation to support the influx of admitted adults with COVID-19. The key challenges included disorganization, loss of autonomy, and compromised patient care. The significant advantages of these adaptations included a sense of learning and comradery. CONCLUSIONS Our study highlighted an unpreparedness in critical care surge capacity. During the COVID-19 pandemic, adaptations rapidly emerged in Canada that involved PICUs with adult care. In the future, preplanned adaptations for optimizing robust critical care services should be developed based on what has been learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".