Does necrotising enterocolitis impact the neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes in preterm infants with birthweight ≤1250 g?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To compare the long-term growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes at 36 months adjusted age in preterm infants (birthweight (BW) < or = 1250 g) with necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) with BW-matched controls. METHODS: This is a case control study performed at a regional tertiary care neonatal intensive care unit. Infants with stage II or III NEC admitted to a regional tertiary care neonatal unit between 1995 and 2000 were identified. Each infant with NEC was matched by BW (+/-100 g) to next two infants admitted in the unit without NEC. Growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes at 36 months are compared. RESULTS: In total, 51 infants with NEC and 102 controls met study eligibility criteria and 146/153 (94.3%) were prospectively followed for 36 months. Infants with NEC had more culture-proven sepsis (35.3% vs. 10.8%, P < 0.001); patent ductus arteriosus requiring therapy (64.7% vs. 45%, P = 0.02), chronic lung disease (60.7% vs. 45%, P = 0.04) and longer hospital stay (84 days vs. 71 days, P < 0.0001). There were no significant differences in growth outcomes between the two groups at 36 months. Overall 24% of infants with NEC had one major neurodevelopmental disability compared with 10% among control infants. Infants who developed NEC had significantly higher cognitive delay (i.e. cognitive index <70) and visual impairment. A logistic regression model identified NEC as a predictor of cognitive delay. CONCLUSION: Preterm infants who develop NEC are at a significantly higher risk for developing neurodevelopmental disability. We recommend close neurodevelopmental follow up for all < or =1250 g infants who develop stage II or III NEC.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".