Professional perceptions of barriers and facilitators from the implementation of a neonatal early supported transfer to home intervention for late preterm infants: A qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Late preterm infants may have prolonged stay in hospital due to increased care needs and a lack of community support. A neonatal early supported transfer to home (NEST@Home) intervention was introduced. We explored professional perceptions of barriers and facilitators to implementation of NEST@Home. Neonatal healthcare professionals in England participated in group interviews based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Data were analysed using thematic analysis. Perceived barriers included lack of facilities, poor clinical buy-in, budget restraints, staff shortages, absence of policy, and a lack of commissioning support. Perceived facilitators to implementation included healthcare professional's positive attitudes, pre-discharge planning, parent education, parent training, and loan of monitoring equipment. This study identified individual, interpersonal, and organisational features that may facilitate or impede the NEST@Home intervention. Further research is needed to identify how this intervention impacts outcomes, and to understand the experience of parents receiving NEST@Home.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".