Enhancing the experience and outcomes of children with complex care needs in acute paediatric settings: a realist review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The number of babies, children and young people with complex care needs (henceforth children with complex care needs (CCCN)) in England has increased in recent decades, and this has also been recognised globally. CCCN may have frequent and lengthy hospital admissions, but during these episodes, their needs are not always met, potentially resulting in suboptimal experiences and outcomes. Despite increased numbers of CCCN accessing acute care and displaying greater complexity, much of the contemporary literature has focused on primary care coordination between health, education and social care. Research specifically focused on CCCN in the acute care setting is largely absent. This realist review aims to understand how optimal experience and outcomes are achieved for CCCN during acute care, in different settings, for whom and why. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This realist review will proceed through six steps: (1) clarifying the scope of the review, (2) searching for evidence, (3) data selection and quality appraisal, (4) data extraction, (5) analysis and synthesis and (6) dissemination. We will search Medline, Cumulated Index in Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PsycINFO, alongside grey literature and other sources and will carry out citation tracking. Patient and public involvement and engagement have aided in the development of this protocol and will be maintained through regular consultations with a stakeholder group throughout the review. The review will result in a programme theory which will include context-mechanism-outcome configurations and provide data to support claims of generative causation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this review as it does not involve primary research. The programme theory developed will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and relevant conferences. It will subsequently inform the development of an intervention to improve acute care for CCCN. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42024591231.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.129 | 0.139 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.010 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".