MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1771023960 · doi:10.3109/14767058.2015.1054275

Cord clamping time in spontaneously breathing preterm neonates in the first minutes after birth: impact on cerebral oxygenation – a prospective observational study

2015· article· en· W1771023960 on OpenAlexaff
Gerhard Pichler, Nariae Baik‐Schneditz, Berndt Urlesberger, Po‐Yin Cheung, Khalid Aziz, Alexander Avian, Georg M. Schmölzer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alexandra HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational ageOxygenationAnesthesiaObservational studyBreathingCord clampingIntraventricular hemorrhageCordBirth weightApgar scorePregnancySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To analyse impact of delayed cord clamping (DCC60sec) on cerebral regional tissue oxygenation (crSO2) and fractional tissue oxygen extraction (cFTOE) in spontaneously breathing preterm neonates during the first 15 min after birth. METHODS: Two-centre observational study, crSO2 and cFTOE was monitored in neonates with DCC60sec or early cord clamping (ECC < 30 s). RESULTS: Seventy-six infants (birth weight and gestational age 1736 ± 508 g and 31.8 ± 2.5 weeks) were included. DCC was associated with lower initial crSO2 and higher cFTOE and lower initial Apgar-score and heart rate. CONCLUSION: Attending practitioners should be aware that DCC might impact initial immediate transition in spontaneously breathing preterm neonates.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal MedicineSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207