Are antenatal steroids beneficial to severely growth restricted fetuses?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Antenatal steroids (AS) have been shown to enhance fetal maturation in preterms and to improve outcome. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of AS in premature severely intrauterine growth restricted infants. The electronic data of 149 inborn, single infants born 24 to 31 6/7 weeks of GA and with a BW ≤ 3rd percentile were reviewed. Infants with congenital anomalies and syndromes were excluded. We compared the outcome of those who received 2 doses of AS (group A, 87 infants) with those who did not receive AS (group B, 62 infants). Sixty-eight infants in group A and 53 in group B were discharged home alive. AS did not improve the neonatal outcome, with the exception of a better cord pH and 5-min Apgar and we did not observe a significant difference in the Griffith's test at 2 years of corrected age, although there was a trend to a higher incidence of severe global delay in the steroid group. In view of the potential cerebral and CVS risks associated with high circulating steroids, the indications for AS in such a population need to be re-evaluated.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".