Facilitators and Barriers to the Implementation of Family Integrated Care in Ontario Level II Neonatal Intensive Care Units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: In Ontario, approximately 8% (11,000) of infants are born preterm (22–<37 weeks gestation) each year. Many of these infants are cared for in a Level II Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). Family Integrated Care (FICare), an innovative model of care, aims to facilitate the involvement of parents in the care of their infants in NICUs. The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of the general and specific needs of Level II NICUs in Ontario prior to implementation of FICare. Methods: Using a cross-sectional study design, two surveys (leadership and site resources) were developed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science Research’s innovation, inner setting, and outer setting constructs and distributed to Level II NICUs medical and nursing leaders. Results: The surveys were sent to 44 Level II NICUs in Ontario, of which 24 hospitals (55%) responded. Key facilitators to implementation of FICare in Level II hospitals in Ontario were leadership interest, availability of staff and parent volunteers, and existing policies to support implementation. The identified barriers were lack of financial resources for new initiatives, skepticism in FICare’s ability to save costs, need for tailored implementation due to variability in NICU characteristics, and the lack of environmental support for prolonged parental presence. Conclusions: This study has confirmed the interest of many Ontario level II NICUs in implementing FICare and variability in their readiness for implementation based on the identified facilitators and barriers.
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 | 0.000 | 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".