MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042721536 · doi:10.1136/adc.2005.092445

Does perinatal asphyxia impair cognitive function without cerebral palsy?

2006· review· en· W2042721536 on OpenAlexaff
Fernando F. Gonzalez, Steven P. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Disease in Childhood Fetal & Neonatal · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteBC Children's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCerebral palsyCognitionEncephalopathyNeonatal encephalopathyMedicineAsphyxiaPediatricsNeuroimagingIntervention (counseling)Perinatal asphyxiaPsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some studies on neurodevelopmental outcomes after neonatal encephalopathy have suggested that cognitive deficits do not occur in the absence of cerebral palsy. It is increasingly apparent that childhood survivors of overt neonatal encephalopathy may have cognitive impairments, even in the absence of functional motor deficits. The risk of cognitive deficits is related to the severity of neonatal encephalopathy and the pattern of brain injury on neuroimaging, particularly the watershed pattern of injury. A better understanding of the risk factors for cognitive abnormalities after neonatal encephalopathy will ultimately lead to interventions to prevent these deficits. Identifying the full spectrum of neurodevelopmental outcomes after neonatal encephalopathy will also allow care givers to identify children requiring early intervention to maximise their potential for independent function throughout development.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations166
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Disease in Childhood Fetal & NeonatalSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207