Parenteral Nutrition-Induced Cholestasis in Neonates: Where Does the Problem Lie?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Parenteral nutrition (PN) is an effective method of nourishing the neonate who is unable to receive full enteral feeds. Cholestasis can be a complication of PN and can lead to severe liver damage. Aim. We describe our patient population and determine risk factors for developing PN cholestasis. Methods. Retrospective chart review of newborns admitted from January 2006 to May 2011 to the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at our institution and received PN >14 days. Cholestasis was defined as serum conjugated bilirubin >50 μ mol/L. Results. Eighty-seven newborns were included; 18 (20.7%) developed PN cholestasis. The most frequent surgical condition for both groups was gastroschisis (8/87; 9.2%). No significant differences were found between the cholestasis and control groups for the following parameters: birth weight, gestational age, intrauterine growth restriction, Apgar scores, and day of life at initiation of enteral feeds. Duration of PN in days and dosage of carbohydrates in g/kg/day were significantly higher in the cholestasis group than the control group. Conclusion. PN-related cholestasis presented in one-fifth of neonates receiving PN for more than two weeks. Longer duration of PN and higher dosage of carbohydrates were independent risk factors for the development of PN cholestasis in this population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".