MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W101768461

Is SIDS on the rise??

2007· article· en· W101768461 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa B E Shields, John C. Hunsaker, Tracey S. Corey, Donna Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSudden infant death syndromeMedicineAsphyxiaPediatricsInfant mortalitySudden deathAutopsyMedical examinerCause of deathMedical emergencyInjury preventionPoison controlPopulationEnvironmental healthDiseasePathologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) is defined as a diagnosis of exclusion, after an evaluation of the medical history, complete postmortem examination, and scene investigation. The diagnosis of SIDS in many sudden and unexplained infant deaths has not been consistently applied nationally or, prior to July 2003, in the state of Kentucky. In order to better standardize practices in formulating the diagnosis of SIDS in cases of sudden and unexpected infant deaths, all of the Kentucky medical examiners formed a working group to collectively standardize the classification of this enigmatic type of infant death. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review (2000-2004) of infants < 1 year who underwent complete historical review, circumstantial investigation, postmortem examination, and toxicological analysis performed at the Medical Examiners' Offices in Kentucky encompassing all deaths certified as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, positional asphyxia, overlay, and undetermined cause and manner of death. RESULTS: A total of 417 cases were deemed sudden unexplained infant deaths after postmortem examination at the Medical Examiners' Offices in Kentucky between 2000 and 2004. A total of 237 (56.8%) infants had been bedsharing with at least one other person when found. Prior to the SIDS classification policy change in July 2003, a significantly greater number of sudden unexpected infant death cases were deemed undetermined in both cause and manner in contrast to a smaller number classified as SIDS. After the policy change, the number of deaths classified as SIDS greatly surpassed the number classified as undetermined. CONCLUSIONS: The increase in the number of deaths consistent with SIDS and a reciprocal decline in cases reported as undetermined cause and manner of death in Kentucky is due to the uniformity and standardization of terminology, rather than an actual increase in the number of infant deaths. The Kentucky policy in July 2003 has been invaluable in ensuring uniform criteria in the diagnosis of SIDS and other categories of sudden unexpected death in infants < 1 year.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleepFrench-language works237,207