Effect of induction of meconium evacuation using per rectal laxatives on neonatal hyperbilirubinemia in term infants: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the efficacy of early meconium evacuation using per rectal laxatives on the level of serum bilirubin and the need for phototherapy in healthy term infants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Systematic review of randomized controlled trials comparing per rectal laxatives versus no intervention was conducted using English language articles identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, Ovid, and CINAHL databases and bibliographies of selected articles. Eligible studies were assessed for the risk of bias in conduct and reporting. RESULTS: A total of three trials (n = 469) mostly with "unclear risk" were eligible for inclusion. Two trials used glycerin suppository whereas one used glycerin enema for meconium evacuation. Meta-analysis was not possible due to clinical heterogeneity in the choice of laxatives and frequency of intervention. In all the three studies, serum bilirubin levels at 48 h and the need for phototherapy was not significantly different between the two groups. Passage of first meconium and the transitional stools occurred significantly early in the intervention group compared to controls. CONCLUSION: Early evacuation of meconium using per rectal laxatives does not offer any significant clinical advantage for neonatal jaundice.
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 | 0.008 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".