Parental Perceptions of the Impact of NICU Visitation Policies and Restrictions Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted parents' ability to participate in their infants' care during the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stay in unprecedented ways. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the lived experience of parents whose infants was in the NICU during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A qualitative telephone interview survey was conducted. Participants included parents of preterm infants who were born less than 34 weeks' gestation during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-August 2020). Telephone surveys were conducted through open-ended questions. A thematic content analysis identifying themes was performed after interviews were completed and transcribed. RESULTS: A total of 8 mothers completed the telephone survey. Key themes from this study include parents experiencing increased stress due to the restricted visitation policies, limited opportunities to care for their infant, lack of support, and inconsistent communication regarding their infant status and COVID-19 protocols. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Suggestions provided to enhance NICU services during the pandemic include increasing parental engagement opportunities to care for their infant in the NICU, enhanced empathy and compassion from the neonatal team, and open and transparent communication. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Further research investigating cultural impact on parents' perspectives, perspectives of fathers, long-term impact of how parents coped after discharge from the NICU, and emotional impact on NICU staff members may be beneficial to aid improvements in NICU service delivery during the ongoing and future 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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".