MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008689765 · doi:10.1055/s-0028-1095185

Time Courses of Intrapartum Asphyxia: Neonatal Characteristics and Outcomes

2008· article· en· W2008689765 on OpenAlexaff
Prakesh S. Shah, Max Perlman

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Perinatology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsphyxiaAdverse effectEncephalopathyAnesthesiaNeonatal encephalopathyAsphyxia NeonatorumPerinatal asphyxiaPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compared neonatal characteristics and adverse outcome rates of neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy following (1) prolonged partial asphyxia, (2) acute near-total intrapartum asphyxia, and (3) the two combined. The time course of the insult was determined individually by two authors from obstetric data and neonatal charts. "Severe adverse outcome" was defined as death or severe disability detectable by age 2 years. The asphyxial time course was prolonged partial asphyxia in 167 (45%), acute near-total asphyxia in 96 (26%), combined in 78 (21%), and indeterminate in 34 (8%) patients. Among patients with known time course and outcomes, 212 (67%) had severe adverse outcome and 103 (33%) were free of severe adverse outcome. Severe adverse outcome rates were 61% for prolonged partial asphyxia, 67% for acute near-total asphyxia, and 79% for combined time course asphyxia ( P = 0.025). Long-term outcomes differ according to the time course of the insult; infants with combined time course had the worst outcome.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PerinatologySame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207