Intraventricular Hemorrhage in the Asphyxiated Newborns Treated with Hypothermia: a centre experience. (P6.274)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Aim: To assess the incidence, the timing, and the risk factors of intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) in asphyxiated term newborns treated with hypothermia. Method: Prospective study of asphyxiated newborns treated with hypothermia between 2008 and 2013. Results: 9[percnt] of these newborns developed IVH. Fifty-three percent had hemorrhage limited to the choroid plexus vessels or IVH without ventricular dilatation; 47[percnt] had IVH with ventricular dilatation with or without parenchymal extension. Sixty-seven percent had an initial normal brain imaging; the diagnostic brain imaging that demonstrated the IVH was obtained either during cooling (in 30[percnt]), within 24 hours of the rewarming (in 30[percnt]), or 24 hours after rewarming (in 40[percnt]). Recurrent seizures were the presenting symptom of IVH during the rewarming in 20[percnt] of the newborns. Coagulopathy was more frequent in the asphyxiated newborns developing IVH (p < 0.001). Asphyxiated newborns developing IVH also presented more frequently with persistent pulmonary hypertension, hypotension, thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy (p = 0.03). Interpretation: Asphyxiated newborns treated with hypothermia appear to be at increased risk of IVH, especially those with significant hemodynamic instability. IVH seems to develop during late hypothermia and rewarming. Efforts should be directed towards maintaining hemodynamic stability in these patients, even during the rewarming.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".