MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404154049 · doi:10.1111/jep.14213

Nursing practice of the prevention and control guidelines for vascular catheter‐related bloodstream infections

2024· article· en· W4404154049 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qingyan Yang, Jingna Li, X. Ai, Ruijing He, Bing Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBloodstream infectionInfection controlVascular accessNursingIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective To apply the Ottawa Model of Research Use to translate the Guidelines for the Prevention and Control of Vascular Catheter‐Associated Bloodstream Infections. Methods The Ottawa model of research use is used to provide a framework and guidance. This study was organized by the Nursing Department of the Affiliated Hospital of Hebei Engineering University, and the Intravenous Therapy Group was responsible for the implementation of the study. The hospital's intravenous therapy administrators, members of the sedation team, and specialist nurses will be organized to evaluate the importance, exactness, and clinical practicability of 34 entries. Twelve clinical departments and intravenous therapy clinics with a high number of central venous catheters were used as sites for translating evidence from this project. The evidence‐based team assessed the practice environment, potential practitioners, and clinical status of clinical translation of evidence through symposia, review of relevant systems, operational procedures, on‐site inspections, and questionnaires. They compare evidence with existing processes and decide on change strategies. Results Before and after the application of the evidence, there was a significant increase in the knowledge, belief, and behavior of healthcare workers on CLABSI prevention and control, especially in the acquisition of related knowledge (χ2 = 26.648 p < 0.001). The associated implementation rate was also significantly improved, with a significant decrease in CLABSI incidence from 0.29 per 1000 to 0.11 per 1000 (χ2 = 8.625 p = 0.004). The assessment of the integration of issues showed that 8 aspects, including workflow, knowledge mastery, monitoring reports, and aseptic operations, do not meet the qualified standards. Conclusion Through this clinical change, a perfect prevention and control system has been established, and the level of knowledge, belief, and behavior of medical staff in preventing CLABSI has been improved, while the incidence of CLABSI has been reduced.

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)0.040
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.126
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0400.126
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Evaluation in Clinical PracticeSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207