MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PP069 Topic: AS09–Global Health/Resource Limited Setting/Health Inequalities/Impact of Global Warming/Other: DEVELOPMENT OF A NOVEL PEDIATRIC CRITICAL CARE RESOURCE EVALUATION (CRITCARE) TOOL FOR HOSPITALS IN RESOURCE VARIABLE SETTINGS

2024· article· en· W4404042132 on OpenAlexaff
Anita V. Arias, Firas Sakaan, Nadeem I. Shafi, Qalab Abbas, H.H. Ammar, John Adabie Appiah, Tigist Bacha, Jhon Camacho‐Cruz, Sebastián González‐Dambrauskas, Niranjan Kissoon, J.H. Lee, E. López Barón, Marianne Majdalani, Rishi P Mediratta, Fiona Muttalib, Gustav Nettey, Cassandra Ocampo, Sheila Agyeiwaa Owusu, Maria Puerto‐Torres, Kenneth E. Remy, J. Rivera, Ephrem Tesfaye, Deni J. Trone, A.V. Saint Andre-Vonarnim, Jiawei Wang, Matthew O. Wiens, Parima Wiphatphumiprates, R.C. Yakubu, A. Holloway, Adnan Bhutta, Teresa Kortz, Asya Agulnik, GAMES Investigators, P.G.H. Subgroup

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineResource (disambiguation)InequalityVariable (mathematics)Global healthHealth careEnvironmental resource managementPublic healthNursingEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims & Objectives: Children with acute critical illness in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are often managed in hospitals with different capacities for providing critical care. Elements that contribute to critical care capacity can include infrastructure, personnel, resources, processes, education and training. This work outlines the development of a pediatric Critical CAre Resource Evaluation (CritCARE) tool which hospitals across resource-variable settings can use to objectively assess their baseline pediatric critical care capacity and identify opportunities for improvement. Methods: A scoping literature review was performed to identify articles published between 2002-2022 describing existing classification schemes for levels of critical care. A group of interdisciplinary, international experts in pediatric critical care medicine (N=29) organized the elements and themes contained within the classification schemes to create a foundational framework of domains and subdomains for the CritCARE tool. Results: Of 1,947 abstracts screened, 27 studies qualified for concept extraction. The expert group identified 5 levels of pediatric critical care services, including: advanced, comprehensive, general, basic, and none. Categorization of critical care resources by level-of-care resulted in 5 domains and 16 subdomains for the CritCARE framework (Table 1).Conclusions: We propose an evidence-informed framework to define pediatric critical care levels and assess capacity at hospitals in resource-variable settings including LMICs. Next, the CritCARE tool will be piloted across 46 global PARITY (Pediatric Acute Critical Illness Study) centers for usability. This tool represents a starting point to help hospitals and health systems identify gaps, self-classify, benchmark and standardize care based on level of services and local resources. Keywords: Global Health, Pediatric Critical Care Medicine, Intensive Care, Metrics

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.163
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.311 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207