MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092362442 · doi:10.1159/000244401

Early Somatosensory Evoked Potentials in Preterm Infants: Their Prognostic Utility

2009· article· en· W2092362442 on OpenAlexaff
Paul G. Ekert, Margot J. Taylor, Nancy Keenan, Jill Boulton, Hilary Whyte

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of the Neonate · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeriventricular leukomalaciaSomatosensory evoked potentialCerebral palsyAnesthesiaSomatosensory systemSurgeryGestational agePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We hypothesized that somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) recorded early in the course of a preterm infant life would be predictive of long-term neurodevelopmental outcome. We recorded unilateral, median nerve SEPs in 88 preterm infants twice in the first 3 weeks of life (SEP1 and SEP2). We found both SEP1 and SEP2 to be significantly associated with the presence of periventricular leukomalacia on head ultrasound (p = 0.04 and p = 0.02 for SEP1 and SEP2, respectively). Both SEP1 and SEP2 were predictive of later cerebral palsy (CP) (p = 0.03 and p = 0.003, respectively). False-positive results were frequent (13 of 17 for SEP1 and 20 of 28 for SEP2). A normal SEP, even when there was periventricular echogenicity on head ultrasound, was associated with a normal outcome in all but 1 instance. SEP1 and SEP2 were less accurate than head ultrasound findings of periventricular leukomalacia in the prediction of later CP (73, 69 and 93%, respectively). SEPs done in the first 3 weeks of life may provide additional prognostic information, particularly when the test is normal. Abnormal SEPs in this period must be interpreted cautiously.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of the NeonateSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207