Parental perceptions and experiences of care in the surgical neonatal intensive care unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Parents endure significant stress when their newborns require surgery while in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Our study aims to explore the surgical NICU experience from the parents’ perspective and identify areas that may improve this experience. A secondary objective was to integrate their feedback to refine the implementation strategy of the neonatal enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS ® ) guideline. Methods In December 2019, five surgical NICU parents participated in a focus group. Conversation surrounded parents’ perspectives and experiences of the surgical NICU. Inductive analysis was performed to identify data, themes, and concepts that emerged from the discussion. Results Participants identified four major interrelated themes that impacted the surgical parents’ NICU experience. These themes include (1) parental state, both physical and emotional, (2) the altered parental caregiver role which necessitates identifying alternative meaningful parental experiences, (3) the care team dynamic, incorporating consistency and effective communication, and (4) the discharge process which may be significantly eased through graduated, hands-on training. Conclusion Key elements of the neonatal ERAS ® guideline address major themes and stressors identified by parents. The parental perspective may help clinicians appreciate the parent surgical NICU experience and assist in improving family-centered care to surgical infants and their families.
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".