Developmental Care in the Early Years in Pediatric Intensive Care Patients as a Strategy to Mitigate Pediatric Post-Intensive-Care Syndrome: A Narrative Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survivors after pediatric critical care often have adverse sequelae in domains of cognition, executive function, attention, memory, visual-spatial skills, language, motor function, behavior, and emotional functioning, the post-intensive-care syndrome pediatric (PICS-p). The time from birth to approximately age 2 years is a period of rapid structural and functional brain development. The fundamental structural and functional architecture of the brain is in place by the second year of life. This narrative review focuses on how we, in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU), can work towards maximizing each patient's full potential despite adverse experiences during hospitalization. In part I, concepts relevant to understanding the effects of hospitalization in PICU on brain development are clarified, including concepts of toxic stress and trauma, sensitive periods and cascades, experience-expectant neural plasticity in the early years, and resilience and buffering of adversity focused on relational care. In part II, evidence is presented that these concepts are important because they describe the effects of early childhood adversity that are pervasive on physical health, cognitive, and emotional outcomes throughout the lifespan. Evidence is presented to show that intervention to improve these outcomes can be effective. In part III, the concepts and evidence are synthesized by focusing on the opportunity before us, what we must and can do better while patients are in the PICU, in order to improve their long-term lifelong outcomes. We present evidence to argue that we in pediatric critical care must take a public-health approach to address the key environmental conditions necessary for optimal early childhood development and hence facilitate children's ability to thrive. Future research must aim to determine what works best and what does not work in the PICU. Early childhood investments to improve lifelong outcomes have great potential to help patients and reduce the growing burden of healthcare costs.
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 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".