Factors associated with car seat test failure in late preterm infants: A retrospective chart review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Professional organizations recommend car seat testing of preterm infants before discharge from hospital. Late preterm infants (LPIs, 34(0/7) to 36(6/7) weeks' gestational age) are at the greatest risk for failure, despite often being well. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of car seat testing failure in LPIs and associative factors. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of inborn LPIs admitted to all levels of newborn care between July 1, 2012 and June 30, 2013. Data collected included maternal demographics, labour and delivery history, and neonatal course. Data were analyzed using backward logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 511 charts were reviewed and 367 LPIs were eligible for inclusion. Of the 313 LPIs tested (mean [± SD] gestational age 36 weeks ±6 days and birth weight 2614±405 g), 80 (26%) failed (95% CI 21% to 31%). Most failed due to desaturations (≥2) of <88% for ≥10 s (n=33 [41%]). Multiple gestation was associated with failure (adjusted OR 2.45 [95% CI 1.44 to 4.18]; P=0.001), and there was a trend toward statistical significance for the variable postnatal age (0.996 [95% CI 0.99 to 1.00]; P=0.05). Infants who passed their car seat test had higher postnatal ages than those who failed (mean difference 39.4 h [95% CI 12.7 h to 66.0 h]; P=0.004). CONCLUSION: Twenty-six percent of LPIs failed car seat testing. Ideally, infants should be tested after an appropriate transitional period. The authors identified factors that may be important in designing future, prospective studies in this area. Future research should evaluate the clinical significance of car seat testing and resource utilization.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".