Invasive fungal infection in very low birthweight infants: national prospective surveillance study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the epidemiology of invasive fungal infection in very low birthweight (VLBW: <1500 g) infants in the United Kingdom. DESIGN: National prospective surveillance study between February 2003 and February 2004 using the British Paediatric Surveillance Unit reporting system reconciled with cases identified through routine laboratory reporting to the Health Protection Agency (England, Wales, and Northern Ireland), the Scottish Centre for Infection and Environmental Health, and the UK Mycology Reference Laboratory. RESULTS: Ninety four confirmed cases of invasive fungal infection were identified during the surveillance period giving an incidence of estimated annual incidence of 10.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.0 to 12.0) cases per 1000 VLBW live births. Eighty one (86%) of the infants were of extremely low birth weight (ELBW: <1000 g), incidence 21.1 (95% CI 16.5 to 25.7) per 1000 ELBW live births. Candida species, predominantly C albicans and C parapsilosis, were isolated in 93% of cases. Most organisms were isolated from the bloodstream and urinary tract. Death occurred in 41% of the infected infants before 37 weeks postconceptional age. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of invasive fungal infection in VLBW and ELBW infants in the United Kingdom is lower than reported in previous studies from tertiary centres in North America and elsewhere. The associated late neonatal and post-neonatal death rates are substantially higher than expected in infants without invasive fungal infection. These data may inform decisions about the evaluation and use of antifungal infection control strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".