Follow-up of the term infant after hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the number of survivors of term hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) is lower than the number of survivors of extreme prematurity, the proportion of neonates with long-term sequelae is higher. All neonates with Sarnat stages 2 (moderate) and 3 (severe) should be enrolled in follow-up programs. The present paper discusses the clinical and imaging diagnostic criteria for HIE, which are essential to decisions about follow-up. Prognostic indicators are also summarized. The recommendations for follow-up and intervention are based on the clinical condition of the baby at the time of discharge from intensive care, including an assessment of feeding, vision, hearing and whether seizures continue to be present. Early assessments (at four to eight months) focus on head growth, general health and motor neurodevelopment. Assessments at 12 to 24 months focus on cognitive skills and language development. Preschool assessments are also strongly recommended to provide for the identification of children requiring early education programs. Knowledge of long-term outcome and its secular changes enhance prognostication, and the evaluation of new preventive and therapeutic approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".