MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134009229 · doi:10.1542/peds.2007-2184

Recurrent Postnatal Infections Are Associated With Progressive White Matter Injury in Premature Infants

2008· article· en· W2134009229 on OpenAlexaff
Hannah C. Glass, Sonia L. Bonifacio, Vann Chau, David V. Glidden, Kenneth J. Poskitt, A. James Barkovich, Donna M. Ferriero, Steven P. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNIH Clinical CenterNational Center for Research ResourcesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsMedicineWhite matterGestational agePediatricsRisk factorHyperintensityInternal medicineMagnetic resonance imagingPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to identify clinical predictors of progressive white matter injury. METHODS: We evaluated 133 infants of <34 weeks of gestation at birth from 2 university hospitals. Infants underwent MRI twice, initially when in stable condition for transport and again at term-equivalent age or before transfer or discharge. Two neuroradiologists who were blinded to the clinical course graded MRI white matter injury severity by using a validated scale. Potential risk factors were extracted from medical charts. RESULTS: Twelve neonates (9.0%) had progressive white matter injury. In the unadjusted analysis of 10 newborns without Candida meningoencephalitis, recurrent culture-positive postnatal infection and chronic lung disease were associated with progressive white matter injury. Exposure to multiple episodes of culture-positive infection significantly increased the risk of progressive white matter injury. Of the 11 neonates with >1 infection, 36.4% (4 infants) had progressive injury, compared with 5.0% (6 infants) of those with

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations167
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207