Risk Factors for Intracranial Hemorrhage among Full-term Infants: A Case-Control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cause of intracranial hemorrhage among full-term infants. METHODS: A retrospective, hospital-based, matched case-control study was conducted at London Health Sciences Center, in southwestern Ontario, for the period from January 1, 1985, to December 31, 1996. Cases were diagnosed with magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, or ultrasonography within 7 days after birth. Control subjects were matched with respect to year of birth, sex, and, for nontransferred case patients only, obstetrician. RESULTS: Sixty-six full-term infants with intracranial hemorrhage were identified, and 104 control subjects were matched. Each factor was independently associated with increased risk of intracranial hemorrhage, as follows: forceps assistance (odds ratio [OR], 4.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-15.1), compared with spontaneous vaginal delivery; 1-minute Apgar scores of 1 through 4 (OR, 110; 95% CI, 5.0-2400) and 5 through 8 (OR, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.3-18.3), compared with scores of 9 or 10 (corresponding 5-min Apgar scores were also statistically significant); and requirements for resuscitation (OR, 5.1; 95% CI, 1.8-14.1), compared with no resuscitation requirements. Of the 52 case patients for whom platelet counts were recorded within 48 hours after birth, 30.8% (95% CI, 18.3-43.3%) exhibited counts of less than 70 x 10(9)/L. Platelet counts of less than 50 x 10(9)/L were specifically associated with intraparenchymal hemorrhage and a more severe radiological grade. Forceps-associated hemorrhage was more frequently subarachnoid and subdural and less frequently intraparenchymal. Such hemorrhage also tended to be more caudal in location. CONCLUSION: Thrombocytopenia seems to be an important cause of intraparenchymal hemorrhage, and the use of forceps is more likely to be associated with subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".