MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165221888 · doi:10.1542/peds.2012-1297

Prognostic Tests in Term Neonates With Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy: A Systematic Review

2012· review· en· W2165221888 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerinatal asphyxiaConfidence intervalEncephalopathyAsphyxiaHypoxic Ischemic EncephalopathyMagnetic resonance imagingMeta-analysisStudy heterogeneityInternal medicinePediatricsRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) after perinatal asphyxia in term neonates causes long-term neurologic sequelae or death. A reliable evidence-based prognosis is essential. The study goal was to investigate the prognostic value of currently used clinical tests in neonatal patients with perinatal asphyxia and HIE. METHODS: Searches were made on MEDLINE, Embase, Central, and CINAHL for studies occurring between January 1980 and November 2011. Studies were included if they (1) evaluated outcome in term infants with perinatal asphyxia and HIE, (2) evaluated prognostic tests, and (3) reported outcome at a minimal follow-up age of 18 months. Study selection, assessment of methodologic quality, and data extraction were performed by 3 independent reviewers. Pooled sensitivities and specificities of investigated tests were calculated when possible. RESULTS: Of the 259 relevant studies, 29 were included describing 13 prognostic tests conducted 1631 times in 1306 term neonates. A considerable heterogeneity was noted in test performance, cut-off values, and outcome measures. The most promising tests were amplitude-integrated electroencephalography (sensitivity 0.93, [95% confidence interval 0.78-0.98]; specificity 0.90 [0.60-0.98]), EEG (sensitivity 0.92 [0.66-0.99]; specificity 0.83 [0.64-0.93]), and visual evoked potentials (sensitivity 0.90 [0.74-0.97]; specificity 0.92 [0.68-0.98]). In imaging, diffusion weighted MRI performed best on specificity (0.89 [0.62-0.98]) and T1/T2-weighted MRI performed best on sensitivity (0.98 [0.80-1.00]). Magnetic resonance spectroscopy demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.75 (0.26-0.96) with poor specificity (0.58 [0.23-0.87]). CONCLUSIONS: This evidence suggests an important role for amplitude-integrated electroencephalography, EEG, visual evoked potentials, and diffusion weighted and conventional MRI. Given the heterogeneity in the tests' performance and outcomes studied, well-designed large prospective studies are needed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.272 · 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