Hypoglycemia in term newborns with a birth weight below the 10th percentile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current recommendations suggest that routine screening for hypoglycemia should be performed in all term newborns with a birth weight (BW) below the 10th percentile. The impact of updated growth curves on the incidence of hypoglycemia in small-for-gestational-age (SGA) newborns has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the occurrence and severity of hypoglycemia in term newborns with a BW between the 10th and fifth percentile, and below the fifth percentile, using recently updated growth curves. DESIGN: A one-year prospective cohort study. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were gestational age of 37 weeks or greater and BW below the 10th percentile. Neonatal hypoglycemia was defined as a blood glucose level of less than 2.6 mmol/L measured after 2 h of life. Blood glucose was measured routinely for all SGA infants during the first 36 h of life. RESULTS: A total of 187 SGA infants met the study criteria: 85 infants with a BW between the 10th and fifth percentile, and 102 infants with a BW below the fifth percentile. The characteristics of the study cohort were similar between BW groups. Twenty-six per cent of the infants screened had at least one episode of hypoglycemia: 22% of infants in the 10th to fifth percentile group and 28% in the less than fifth percentile group. Hypoglycemia was symptomatic in four infants, all of whom were below the fifth percentile for BW. The mean (± SD) lowest blood glucose level was 2.1±0.4 mmol/L (range 0.6 mmol/L to 2.5 mmol/L) in the 10th to fifth percentile group and 2.0±0.5 mmol/L (range 0.8 mmol/L to 2.5 mmol/L) in the less than fifth percentile group (P=0.05). CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrates a high incidence of hypoglycemia among SGA infants with a BW below the 10th percentile using updated growth curves. There was no difference in the incidence of hypoglycemia among SGA infants with a BW below the fifth percentile versus those with a BW between the 10th and fifth percentile.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".