MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316480452 · doi:10.1056/nejm200106283442602

Long-Term Effects of Indomethacin Prophylaxis in Extremely-Low-Birth-Weight Infants

2001· article· en· W2316480452 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Schmidt, Peter G. Davis, Diane Moddemann, Arne Ohlsson, Robin S. Roberts, Saroj Saigal, Alfonso Solimano, Michael Vincer, Linda L. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsMedicineDuctus arteriosusIntraventricular hemorrhageOdds ratioPlaceboLow birth weightNecrotizing enterocolitisBirth weightRetinopathy of prematurityPulmonary hemorrhageAnesthesiaBronchopulmonary dysplasiaPediatricsGestational ageSurgeryInternal medicinePregnancyLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The prophylactic administration of indomethacin reduces the frequency of patent ductus arteriosus and severe intraventricular hemorrhage in very-low-birth-weight infants (those with birth weights below 1500 g). Whether prophylaxis with indomethacin confers any long-term benefits that outweigh the risks of drug-induced reductions in renal, intestinal, and cerebral blood flow is not known. METHODS: Soon after they were born, we randomly assigned 1202 infants with birth weights of 500 to 999 g (extremely low birth weight) to receive either indomethacin (0.1 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo intravenously once daily for three days. The primary outcome was a composite of death, cerebral palsy, cognitive delay, deafness, and blindness at a corrected age of 18 months. Secondary long-term outcomes were hydrocephalus necessitating the placement of a shunt, seizure disorder, and microcephaly within the same time frame. Secondary short-term outcomes were patent ductus arteriosus, pulmonary hemorrhage, chronic lung disease, ultrasonographic evidence of intracranial abnormalities, necrotizing enterocolitis, and retinopathy. RESULTS: Of the 574 infants with data on the primary outcome who were assigned to prophylaxis with indomethacin, 271 (47 percent) died or survived with impairments, as compared with 261 of the 569 infants (46 percent) assigned to placebo (odds ratio, 1.1; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.8 to 1.4; P=0.61). Indomethacin reduced the incidence of patent ductus arteriosus (24 percent vs. 50 percent in the placebo group; odds ratio, 0.3; P<0.001) and of severe periventricular and intraventricular hemorrhage (9 percent vs. 13 percent in the placebo group; odds ratio, 0.6; P=0.02). No other outcomes were altered by the prophylactic administration of indomethacin. CONCLUSIONS: In extremely-low-birth-weight infants, prophylaxis with indomethacin does not improve the rate of survival without neurosensory impairment at 18 months, despite the fact that it reduces the frequency of patent ductus arteriosus and severe periventricular and intraventricular hemorrhage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations717
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicCardiovascular Conditions and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207