Transfusion-associated necrotising enterocolitis in neonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between blood transfusion in previous 2 days and necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) in infants admitted to neonatal intensive care units in Canada. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using the Canadian Neonatal Network database of admissions to neonatal intensive care units from 2003 to 2008, cases with NEC were matched with controls by gestational age (GA) at birth. Exposure to transfusion within 2 days of NEC (for cases) or 2 days before the median age of NEC diagnosis among cases of the same GA (for controls) was determined. After controlling for confounders, the differences in characteristics and neonatal outcomes of transfusion-associated NEC (TANEC) and NEC not associated with transfusion (non-TANEC) were compared. RESULTS: NEC cases (n=927) were matched with 2781 controls. Transfusion in previous 2 days was significantly higher in NEC cases than in controls (15.5 vs 7.7%; adjusted OR (AOR) 2. 44; 95% CI 1.87 to 3.18). TANEC cases versus non-TANEC cases had a lower mean GA (25.8 vs 29.3 weeks), a lower mean birthweight (885 vs 1373 grams), and a higher proportion of infants with SNAPII score >20 (52.1 vs 22.9%). After adjustment for confounders, no significant differences in mortality (AOR 1.28, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.01), severe retinopathy (AOR 1.15, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.87), or severe neurological injury (AOR 0.83, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.60) were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to transfusion in previous 2 days was an independent risk factor for NEC. After controlling for confounders, no significant differences in mortality and morbidities were observed between infants who had transfusion-associated NEC and those with NEC not associated with transfusion.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".