Outcomes of Late-Preterm Infants: A Retrospective, Single-Center, Canadian Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the prevalence of major morbidities and mortality of inborn, late-preterm infants. Methods. A retrospective review was conducted from 2004 to 2008. Descriptive outcomes were compared with predefined aggregate outcomes of term infants during the same period. RESULTS: Data on 1193 late-preterm and 8666 term infants were compared. Majority of late-preterm infants were 36 weeks (43.6%), followed by 35 weeks (29.2%) and 34 weeks (27.2%), respectively. The prevalence of intensive care admission, respiratory support, pneumothorax, and mortality in late preterm infants was significantly higher compared with term infants. Mechanical ventilation and continuous positive airway pressure rates substantially decreased with increased gestational age. Although only 1.0% had positive cultures, 28.5% received parenteral antibiotics. The late-preterm group had a 12-fold higher risk of death with an overall mortality rate of 0.8%. CONCLUSION: This study confirmed the high-risk status of late-preterm infants with worse mortality and morbidities compared with term infants.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".