Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Apgar score is a standardized tool for evaluating newborns in the delivery room. Despite its long history and widespread use, debate remains over its reliability of predicting neonatal outcomes, especially in extremely low-birth-weight premature infants. The aim of the study was to examine the relationship between the 5-minute Apgar score of extremely low-birth-weight infants, as it relates to survival and morbidities associated with prematurity and length of hospital stay. A retrospective query of the Alere neonatal database from 2001 to 2011 examined all infants less than 32 weeks' gestation and less than 1000-g birth weight. The 5-minute Apgar score was divided into 2 groups, score of 4 or greater or less than 4. The study compared results of the 5-minute Apgar score and associated morbidities in surviving infants. Statistical analyses included chi-square, Fisher exact test, t test, and multivariate regression. The sample consisted of 3898 infants with an 86.4% (n = 3366) survival rate. Controlling for gestational age and birth weight, surviving infants with a 5-minute Apgar score of less than 4 were more likely to demonstrate nonintact survival. Infants with a low 5-minute Apgar score have greater risk for mortality and morbidities associated with prematurity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".