Methylxanthine Therapy for Apnea of Prematurity: Evaluation of Treatment Benefits and Risks at Age 5 Years in the International Caffeine for Apnea of Prematurity (CAP) Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Methylxanthine therapy reduces the frequency of apnea and the need for mechanical ventilation. Recent research has raised concerns about the safety of methylxanthines in very preterm infants. Possible adverse effects include poor growth, worsening of hypoxic-ischemic brain damage and abnormal childhood behavior. Over 2,000 infants with birth weights 500-1,250 g have been randomized in the international placebo-controlled Caffeine for Apnea of Prematurity (CAP) trial to examine the long-term efficacy and safety of methylxanthine therapy for the management of apnea of prematurity. Additional therapies such as continuous positive airway pressure were used as necessary to control apneic attacks. At 18 months we measure the combined rate of death or survival with one or more of the following impairments: cerebral palsy, cognitive deficit, blindness and deafness. This outcome was chosen because of the need to evaluate the impact of common neonatal therapies beyond discharge from the intensive care unit. However, several potential long-term consequences of methylxanthine therapy may not become apparent until the study cohort reaches pre-school age. We will therefore extend the follow-up to age 5 years. The main outcome at 5 years will be a composite of death or survival with severe disability in at least one of six domains: cognition, neuromotor function, vision, hearing, behavior, and general health. Once this project is completed, caffeine will be one of the most rigorously evaluated neonatal therapies.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".