MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417248880 · doi:10.1136/bmjpo-2025-003660

Wait a Minute or More (WAMM): a pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomised implementation trial assessing the effect of a quality improvement programme on the proportion of infants achieving delayed cord clamping more than 60 s in infants <37 weeks’ gestation in up to 20 maternity hospitals

2025· article· en· W4417248880 on OpenAlexaff
Himanshu Popat, Kristy Robledo, Sarah Finlayson, Melinda Cruz, Angela Cavallaro, Alpana Ghadge, Naomi Spotswood, Amy Keir, Christoph Lehner, Sailesh Kumar, Graeme R. Polglase, Dennis Bonney, Malcolm Battin, Tobias Strunk, Adrienne Gordon, Khalid Aziz, Gill Harvey, Kei Lui, William O. Tarnow‐Mordi

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Paediatrics Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNeonatal skin health care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsQuality managementCluster (spacecraft)Cord clampingCluster randomised controlled trialClampingPerformance improvement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Delayed cord clamping (DCC) is an evidence-based intervention that reduces mortality, anaemia and disability in infants born <37 weeks’ gestation who do not require immediate resuscitation. However, it is neither reliably recorded nor routinely implemented in Australia. The Wait a Minute or More (WAMM) study aims to reduce this gap between the evidence and practice by integrating timely sharing of cord clamping data with Evidence-based Practice for Improving Quality methods to increase the proportion of preterm infants receiving DCC for 60 s or longer (DCC60). Methods The WAMM study is a pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomised trial (SW-CRT), informed by the Integrated-Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARIHS) framework. Up to 20 Australian maternity hospitals will participate in this pragmatic SW-CRT to evaluate if in ( Population ) infants <37 weeks’ gestation who do not need resuscitation, does ( Intervention ) the WAMM intervention (sharing of anonymised data on DCC60, together with a locally adapted quality improvement (QI) programme), compared with ( Control ) sharing of anonymised data on DCC60 alone, increase ( primary Outcome ) the proportion of infants receiving DCC60? At the end of 72 weeks, all sites will complete an 8-week period without the WAMM intervention to evaluate if implementation of DCC is sustained. Alongside the SW-CRT, an embedded process evaluation will assess the fidelity, acceptability, mechanisms of action and contextual barriers and enablers of the WAMM intervention. Discussion Using the stepped wedged design and guided by an explicit implementation framework (i-PARIHS), WAMM will provide information on the effectiveness and transferability of a locally adapted QI method to improve DCC60. If proven effective, ultimately scaling up the WAMM intervention globally will greatly improve childhood anaemia, death, disability and long-term costs. Trial registration number ACTRN12624000035527.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.432 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Paediatrics OpenSame topicNeonatal skin health careFrench-language works237,207