Influence of Shielding TPN From Photooxidation on the Number of Early Blood Transfusions in ELBW Premature Neonates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The smallest premature neonates often receive blood transfusions early in life. Nonrestrictive transfusion policies are linked to deleterious outcomes. Exposure of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) to ambient light generates oxidation products associated with haemolysis in vitro. Shielding TPN from light limits oxidation. Our hypothesis was protecting TPN from light decreases haemolysis and therefore the need for early blood transfusions. METHODS: Comparison of haemolysis between animals fed enterally and those receiving TPN, and exploratory case-control retrospective analysis of transfusion counts in premature infants receiving light-exposed or light-protected TPN. The statistical analysis was analysis of variance and longitudinal binomial regression model adjusting for potential covariables of transfusion counts. RESULTS: In animals, TPN is associated with higher (P<0.05) haemolysis compared with enteral feeds; photoprotection induces lower peroxide load with no effect on the level of haemolysis. In premature infants, light-exposed (n=76) or light-protected (n=57) populations exhibited similar clinical characteristics. Initial haematocrit, gestational age, and index of disease severity had a significant effect on the number of transfusions. When adjusting for these covariables, photoprotection was no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: Even though peroxides are associated in vitro with haemolysis, shielding TPN from light to reduce infused peroxides does not significantly decrease the need for early transfusions in premature infants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".