Parental Perspectives on Impact of Parental Presence Restrictions in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit During the COVID-19 pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe parental experiences in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) during the COVID-19 restrictions. We explore what parents found most challenging, the impact these restrictions had on them and their infant, and how they coped. METHODS: A cross-sectional online survey was completed by parents of infants who required care in a Canadian NICU during the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data from 3 questions were coded using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants ( n = 161) were primarily mothers (93%), with an average length of stay of 32.1 days. Three themes were identified from responses: (1) emotional and physical closeness of the parents to their infant; (2) physical and psychosocial well-being of the infant and parent; and (3) how parents coped, and strategies for moving forward. Parents reported that parental restriction policies adversely impacted their perceived physical and emotional closeness with their infant and their infant's physical and psychosocial well-being. Parents reported that being able to be present with their infant, having their partner able to be present with them, and effective communication helped them cope. CONCLUSION: Despite the need for some restrictive policies to control the spread of the virus, the benefits and risks to the overall well-being of the parents and infants must be weighed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".