Center effect and other factors influencing temporization and shunting of cerebrospinal fluid in preterm infants with intraventricular hemorrhage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECT: There is little consensus regarding the indications for surgical CSF diversion (either with implanted temporizing devices [reservoir or subgaleal shunt] or shunt alone) in preterm infants with posthemorrhagic hydrocephalus. The authors determined clinical and neuroimaging factors associated with the use of surgical CSF diversion among neonates with intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH), and describe variations in practice patterns across 4 large pediatric centers. METHODS: The use of implanted temporizing devices and conversion to permanent shunts was examined in a consecutive sample of 110 neonates surgically treated for IVH related to prematurity from the 4 clinical centers of the Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network (HCRN). Clinical, neuroimaging, and so-called processes of care factors were analyzed. RESULTS: Seventy-three (66%) of the patients underwent temporization procedures, including 50 ventricular reservoir and 23 subgaleal shunt placements. Center (p < 0.001), increasing ventricular size (p = 0.04), and bradycardia (p = 0.07) were associated with the use of an implanted temporizing device, whereas apnea, occipitofrontal circumference (OFC), and fontanel assessments were not. Implanted temporizing devices were converted to permanent shunts in 65 (89%) of the 73 neonates. Only a full fontanel (p < 0.001) and increased ventricular size (p = 0.002) were associated with conversion of the temporizing devices to permanent shunts, whereas center, OFCs, and clot characteristics were not. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable center variability exists in neurosurgical approaches to temporization of IVH in prematurity within the HCRN; however, variation between centers is not seen with permanent shunting. Increasing ventricular size-rather than classic clinical findings such as increasing OFCs-represents the threshold for either temporization or shunting of CSF.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".