Effects of predictive nursing combined with bird nest nursing intervention on motor function, intelligence and growth development of neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through the analysis of the existing case data, this study explored the application effect of predictive nursing combined with bird nest nursing in children with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy. The data of 120 children with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy admitted to our hospital from May 2019 to June 2021 were retrospectively analyzed, and they were divided into A (n = 40), B (n = 40) and C (n = 40) groups according to different nursing methods. Neonatal neurobehavioral assessment (NBNA), Canadian derivatives clearing corporation (CDCC) and Gesell Developmental Schedules (GDS) scores were compared among the three groups. Height, body mass, daily sleep time, milk intake and the occurrence of neurological sequelae were compared among the three groups. After intervention, the score of group A was higher than that of group B and C, with group B higher than group C (P<0.05). In addition, both mental developmental index (MDI) and psychomotive development index (PDI) of the three groups were all improved, in which Group A was the highest, followed by Group B (P<0.05). Scores of GDS of group A and B were higher than those of group C, while GDS of group A were higher than those of group B (P<0.05). After intervention, increases of height, body mass and milk intake in group A and B were greater than those in group C, while the increases of height and body mass in group A were better than those in group B (P<0.05).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".