A Clinical Prediction Model to Stratify Retinopathy of Prematurity Risk Using Postnatal Weight Gain
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop an efficient clinical prediction model that includes postnatal weight gain to identify infants at risk of developing severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP). Under current birth weight (BW) and gestational age (GA) screening criteria, <5% of infants examined in countries with advanced neonatal care require treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was a secondary analysis of prospective data from the Premature Infants in Need of Transfusion Study, which enrolled 451 infants with a BW < 1000 g at 10 centers. There were 367 infants who remained after excluding deaths (82) and missing weights (2). Multivariate logistic regression was used to predict severe ROP (stage 3 or treatment). RESULTS: Median BW was 800 g (445-995). There were 67 (18.3%) infants who had severe ROP. The model included GA, BW, and daily weight gain rate. Run weekly, an alarm that indicated need for eye examinations occurred when the predicted probability of severe ROP was >0.085. This identified 66 of 67 severe ROP infants (sensitivity of 99% [95% confidence interval: 94%-100%]), and all 33 infants requiring treatment. Median alarm-to-outcome time was 10.8 weeks (range: 1.9-17.6). There were 110 (30%) infants who had no alarm. Nomograms were developed to determine risk of severe ROP by BW, GA, and postnatal weight gain. CONCLUSION: In a high-risk cohort, a BW-GA-weight-gain model could have reduced the need for examinations by 30%, while still identifying all infants requiring laser surgery. Additional studies are required to determine whether including larger-BW, lower-risk infants would reduce examinations further and to validate the prediction model and nomograms before clinical use.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it