Identifying Infants at Risk for Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to analyze the consistency in using a standardized newborn toxicology screening protocol to identify infants at risk of developing neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS). DESIGN: A retrospective cohort comparison design was approved by the institutional review board at the regional hospital and used to gather data from the infants' medical records during the study period. SETTING: The data were collected for a period of 1 year from a regional hospital serving 100,000 patients per annum. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Data were based on expectant mothers who delivered between March 2006 and March 2007. METHOD: Data of maternal self-reported substance use, and urine toxicology results and meconium results were obtained through retrospective chart review of infants exhibiting signs of NAS as noted by nurses on the Finnegan Scoring Tool. RESULTS: In the absence of accurate prenatal screening, this study lends positively to support the use of toxicology screening protocols at birth to adequately assess and treat infants exposed to illicit substances. Toxicology screening in not intrusive and despite emotional discomfort experienced by mothers of the infants tested, the benefits of attaining accurate information regarding substance exposure is critical for the well-being of the infant. CONCLUSION: The use of a toxicology screening protocol at birth appears beneficial in determining the need for identifying infants with NAS. Early detection of substance exposure in newborns leads to timely assessment for NAS and subsequent treatment to reduce symptoms in newborns.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".