DOES THE ANTENATAL DETECTION OF SMALL-FOR-GESTATIONAL-AGE BABIES INFLUENCE THEIR TWO-YEAR OUTCOMES?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to determine whether antenatal detection of small-for-gestational-age (SGA) babies influences 2-year outcomes. All low-birth-weight (<2,500g) infants born in South-EastThames region, England from September 1, 1992 to August 31, 1993 were identified at birth. Antenatal "suspicion" and ultrasound assessment confirming growth restriction was categorized as "detection" of SGA. Postnatally, infants were classified as SGA if they had a birth weight for given gestation below the 10th centile. At 2 years, those below 32 weeks' gestation and a random 25% sample of infants of 32 weeks' gestation or more underwent pediatric assessments. Of 49,787 births, 3,456 (6.9%) were of low birth weight. One thousand four hundred and fifty one (42.5%) were SGA, of whom 611 (42%) were detected antenatally by ultrasound scan. At 2 years, 1,008 (75.8%) of 1,358 expected infants were assessed, 379 (37.6%) were SGA at birth, and 188 (49.6%) were confirmed antenatally. Although undetected infants had higher mean birth weights and gestational ages, they had a higher proportion of perinatal deaths (12.6 vs. 6.4%, RR 1.96: CI 1.32-2.86) than detected infants. At 2 years, detected SGA infants had smaller head circumferences (p = 0.026), a higher prevalence of febrile convulsions (8.0 vs. 3.1 %: p = 0.040) and lower scores on the locomotor (DQA) scale of Griffith's developmental test (p = 0.021) compared with undetected SGA infants. Despite detected SGA fetuses having lower weights and gestation at birth than undetected fetuses, they had significantly lower mortality without a parallel increase in severe 2-year neuro-developmental, clinical, or growth morbidity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".