63 Translational Research Capacity in Canadian Pediatric Emergency Departments Participating in the Precision Medicine for Improving the Diagnosis of Pediatric Appendicitis in the Emergency Department (PRIMED) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Pediatric clinical and translational research are essential to acquire effective diagnostic and treatment options for children, but they are underfunded and under prioritized in comparison to research focused on treatments for adults. The Precision Medicine for Improving the Diagnosis of Pediatric Appendicitis in the Emergency Department (PRIMED) study aimed to characterize the proteomic and metabolic bio-profiles of children with appendicitis and to investigate these bio-profiles as a clinical prediction tool. Objectives In this current work, we aimed to evaluate translational research capacity at Canadian pediatric Emergency Departments (EDs) and to describe some of the challenges experienced in the implementation of the PRIMED study and various strategies used to improve local research capacity. Design/Methods Participating sites provided basic demographic and administrative data along with laboratory- and human-resource availability during enrolment for the PRIMED study. Data was summarized using descriptive statistics. Eleven pediatric EDs participated in the PRIMED study. Results Six study hospitals (54.5%) used on-site clinical laboratories to process research samples; the remaining hospitals (5/11, 45.5%) required access to research facilities, of which two (18.2%) were off-site. Fewer than two thirds of the study sites (7/11, 63.6%) had any laboratory that would process samples 24 hours per day. Four study sites (36.4%) only enrolled patients during business hours and over half of the sites (6/11, 54.5%) were unable to collect samples for the entire 17:00 to 21:00 peak when the greatest number of pediatric patients present to the ED (Figure 1). There was no nighttime coverage for patient enrollment and sample collection and only three study sites (3/11, 27.3%) had enrollment hours that captured over 75% of the potential study participants. Over half (6/11, 54.5%) of the PRIMED study sites developed novel processes to enable study success, for example creating graduate student on-call schedules and hiring bioscience trained site coordinators to perform sample processing requirements. Conclusion Despite site-specific efforts to overcome resource barriers, the gap in translational research capacity at academic pediatric emergency departments remains a significant concern. University research institutes and pediatric hospitals should invest in infrastructure and human resources to increase after-hours clinical and translational research capacity to optimize child health and wellness outcomes.
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 | 0.029 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".