Importância da avaliação oftalmológica em recém-natos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To verify the existence of ocular diseases in the first 48 hours of life of newborns and relate it to the clinical suspicious of pediatricians. METHODS: A prospective study was performed. All infants that were born between July and December of 2000 were evaluated in the nursery of Hospital Universitário Evangélico de Curitiba (HUEC). Six hundred sixty-seven newborns were evaluated through a protocol by residents and tutors of ophthalmology, regardless of pediatricianś suspicious of ocular disorder. The examination consisted of inspection, oblique illumination, evaluation of ocular deviation and direct ophthalmoscopy (red reflex) in all patients. RESULTS: Among all examined newborns, 3.75% showed some ocular disease. The most frequent problem was corneal opacity. The ocular diseases were not noticed by pediatricians, neonatologists and parents in fifty-six per cent of the cases presenting some problem. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that many ocular disorders presented at birth are not noticed by pediatricians (56%), which highlights the importance of ophthalmological evaluation in all newborns as a routine examination in the first 48 hours of life.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".