A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Prophylactic Fluconazole in Preterm Neonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Invasive candida infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in preterm infants. We performed a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fluconazole for the prevention of fungal colonization and infection in very-low-birth-weight neonates. METHODS: During a 15-month period, all neonates weighing less than 1500 g at birth from eight tertiary Italian neonatal intensive care units (322 infants) were randomly assigned to receive either fluconazole (at a dose of either 6 mg or 3 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo from birth until day 30 of life (day 45 for neonates weighing <1000 g at birth). We performed weekly surveillance cultures and systematic fungal susceptibility testing. RESULTS: Among infants receiving fluconazole, fungal colonization occurred in 9.8% in the 6-mg group and 7.7% in the 3-mg group, as compared with 29.2% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both fluconazole groups vs. the placebo group). The incidence of invasive fungal infection was 2.7% in the 6-mg group and 3.8% in the 3-mg group, as compared with 13.2% in the placebo group (P=0.005 for the 6-mg group and P=0.02 for the 3-mg group vs. the placebo group). The use of fluconazole did not modify the relationship between colonization and the subsequent development of invasive fungal infection. Overall mortality was similar among groups, as was the incidence of cholestasis. No evidence for the emergence of resistant candida species was observed, but the study did not have substantial power to detect such an effect. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic fluconazole reduces the incidence of colonization and invasive candida infection in neonates weighing less than 1500 g at birth. The benefit of treating candida colonization is unclear. (Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN85753869 [controlled-trials.com]).
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".