MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Single Versus Repeat Courses of Antenatal Steroids to Improve Neonatal Outcomes: Risks and Benefits

2007· review· en· W2082035203 on OpenAlexaff
Clarissa Bonanno, Karin Fuchs, Ronald J. Wapner

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrical & Gynecological Survey · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsColumbia College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObstetricsIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent additions to the literature provide evidence supporting the use of repeat courses of antenatal steroids. Both human and animal studies offer evidence that repeat courses of corticosteroids improve neonatal pulmonary outcomes, especially for the infants delivered at earlier gestational ages. Although there is also evidence to suggest altered neuronal maturation and intrauterine growth restriction in animals treated with repeat steroids, randomized controlled studies in humans have shown that birth weight reduction was only seen in those infants treated with 4 or more courses of corticosteroids. In addition, the reduction in neonatal birth weight and head circumference seen after multiple courses of antenatal corticosteroids normalizes by the time of hospital discharge. Studies are ongoing to investigate the 24-month postdelivery physical and neurodevelopmental outcomes in infants exposed to repeat courses of antenatal corticosteroids. Although there is evidence demonstrating the safety of a single repeat, or “rescue”, dose of antenatal corticosteroids, this must be tempered against the adverse effects seen after multiple courses of weekly repeat steroids. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal number of courses of antenatal steroids to reduce the frequency of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) without adversely affecting other neonatal outcomes. Target Audience: Obstetricians & Gynecologists, Family Physicians Learning Objectives: After completion of this article, the reader should be able to recall that although there are studies that support repeated courses of antenatal steroids, 24-month postdelivery and neurodevelopmental studies in infants exposed to repeated antenatal steroids are ongoing and also state that a “rescue”, single repeat dose, seven days after the first dose, appears prudent in only those mothers who are imminent of delivery prior to 32 weeks’ gestation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.393
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.083 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrical & Gynecological SurveySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207