Meconium aspiration syndrome in infants of HIV-positive women: a case-control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to determine whether maternal HIV infection in the current era is associated with an increased incidence of meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS) in their infants. METHODS: Infants born to 149 HIV-positive women at our hospital over a 5-year period were compared with infants born to HIV-negative women in a retrospective case-control study. Charts of all 298 patients included in the study were reviewed for maternal and infant demographics, HIV treatment, vertical transmission and untoward events at delivery or during the hospital course. RESULTS: When compared with HIV-negative women, a greater proportion of HIV-positive women had meconium-stained amniotic fluid (MSAF), 33% vs. 13%, P<0.001; and thick MSAF, 17% vs. 5%, P<0.001, respectively. Seven of 298 infants were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit for MAS; all seven were born to HIV-positive women (P=0.015). Although in utero exposure to illicit drugs is a reported risk factor for meconium staining of the amniotic fluid and such drug exposure was more common among our HIV-positive sample, controlling for this and other possible covariates did not greatly reduce the association of HIV status with meconium-related complications of delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Infants born to HIV-positive women had significantly more MSAF and MAS than infants born to non-infected women. It is unclear whether this association results from maternal HIV infection itself or from anti-retroviral therapy. Maternal and infant care providers should be prepared for this complication when attending to the deliveries of HIV-positive women.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".