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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
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