Health-Related Quality of Life for Extremely Low Birth Weight Adolescents in Canada, Germany, and the Netherlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The goal was to compare health-related quality of life of 12- to 16-year-old adolescents born at an extremely low birth weight in regional cohorts from Ontario (Canada), Bavaria (Germany), and the Netherlands. METHODS: Patients were extremely low birth weight survivors from Canada, Germany, and the Netherlands. Health-related quality of life was assessed with Health Utilities Index 3. Missing data were substituted by proxy reports. Differences in mean Health Utilities Index 3 scores were tested by using analysis of variance. Differences in the numbers of children with affected attributes were tested by using logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Survival rates were similar; response rates varied between 71% and 90%. Significant differences in health-related quality of life were found between the cohorts, with Dutch children scoring highest on Health Utilities Index 3 and German children scoring lowest, independent of birth weight, gestational age, and cerebral palsy. Differences in mean utility scores were mainly attributable to differences in the cognition health attribute. Most of the results were corroborated by logistic regression analyses. CONCLUSIONS: There were significant differences between the 3 cohorts in health-related quality of life, not related to differences in birth weight, gestational age, or cerebral palsy. Survival and response rates alone cannot explain these differences.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".