Retinopathy of prematurity: Risk factors and variability in Canadian neonatal intensive care units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in a large population-based cohort and to examine risk-adjusted variations across units. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of Canadian Neonatal Network data on neonates with birth weight <1500 g who were screened for ROP between 2003 and 2010. Characteristics of infants with and without ROP were compared and a risk-adjusted model for severe ROP was developed. Rates of severe ROP were compared between sites. RESULTS: 1163 of 9187 (12.7%) infants developed severe ROP. Lower gestational age, male sex, small for gestational age, patent ductus arteriosus, late onset sepsis, more than two blood transfusions, inotrope use, and outborn status were associated with an increased risk of severe ROP. Severe ROP rates varied significantly between units. CONCLUSION: Younger, smaller and sicker male infants had higher adjusted risks of severe ROP and rates varied significantly among sites.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".