MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MRI obtained during versus after hypothermia in asphyxiated newborns

2015· article· en· W2144265024 on OpenAlexafffund
Elodie Boudes, Xianming Tan, Christine Saint‐Martin, Michael Shevell, Pia Wintermark

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Disease in Childhood Fetal & Neonatal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsHypothermiaMedicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the brain MRI results obtained during hypothermia identify the later brain injury observed in asphyxiated newborns after therapy is completed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Asphyxiated newborns treated with hypothermia were prospectively enrolled in this study if they had at least one MRI performed during hypothermia treatment and then another MRI performed around day 10 of life. RESULTS: A total of 129 MRI scans were obtained from 43 asphyxiated newborns treated with hypothermia. Sixty per cent developed brain injury; all the brain injuries observed on the late scans were already present on day 2-3 of life during hypothermia, and the extent of injury was similar between the early and late scans. The brain MRI on day 2-3 of life had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI 84% to 100%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI 77% to 100%) to identify the presence and extent of later brain injury. CONCLUSIONS: The brain MRIs performed during hypothermia already permit an accurate definition of the presence and extent of brain injury that later develop in asphyxiated newborns despite treatment. These results may have research and clinical implications for the care of these newborns.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations53
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Disease in Childhood Fetal & NeonatalSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207