ArticleJornal de pediatria
What most captures the physician's interest when evaluating a multiparameter monitor in a Neonatal ICU? - A simulation study.
Article in Jornal de pediatria. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the gaze of physicians in the Neonatal ICU setting when evaluating a multiparameter monitor to determine the presence/absence of vital sign alterations.
methodsPediatricians' gaze was tracked when they evaluated a 30-second video of a multiparametric monitor on a screen. They assessed one of three scenarios: Normal, Tachycardia, or Hyperoxia. Eight areas of interest (AOI) were defined: Heart rate(HR), Electrocardiogram(ECG), SpO₂, Pulse wave(PulseW), Respiratory rate(RR), Respiration curve(Resp.C), Blood pressure(BP), and Temperature(Temp.). Gaze fixation on each AOI was analyzed in three periods:0-3, 0-5, 0-10 s. Generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the effect of the parameters/scenarios on the participants' likelihood of gaze fixation on each AOI.
resultsEighty physicians (86% female; 35.3 ± 8.2 years old) were evaluated. At 0-3 s, 0-5 s, and 0-10 s, the percentage of physicians who fixed their gaze on each AOI was, respectively:HR: 93, 96, 98%; ECG: 73, 79, 89%; SpO2: 75, 94, 95%; PulseW: 86, 88, 98%; RR: 48, 80, 95%; Resp.C: 26, 49, 73%; BP: 35, 63, 98%; Temp: 31, 53, 91%. Compared with HR, the likelihood of gaze fixation was lower at 0-3 s, for ECG (Odds Ratio-OR: 0.21), SpO2 (OR: 0.24), RR (OR: 0.07), RespC (OR: 0.03), BP (OR: 0.04) and Temp (OR: 0.04); at 0-5 s, for ECG (OR: 0.14), RR (OR; 0.16), Resp.C (OR: 0.04), BP (OR: 0.07) and Temp (OR: 0.04); and at 0-10 s, only for Resp.C (OR: 0.07).
conclusionIn the neonatal ICU setting, when assessing the monitor, HR attracts physicians' initial attention, followed by oximetry parameters.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.