101: Delayed Cord Clamping and Neurodevelopment in a Cohort of Extremely Preterm Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Delayed cord clamping (DCC) for up to 3 minutes has been found to improve in-patient outcomes in very preterm infants (Rabe 2008). The impact on neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) is uncertain. This retrospective study aimed to determine if there is an association between DCC and the incidence of severe NDI or death. Data were abstracted from Neonatal Unit and Follow-Up databases for babies born 3 std. dev. below mean and Bayley III scores 2–3 std. dev. below mean. Severe neurological impairment defined as: non-ambulatory cerebral palsy (GMFCS 3–5) composite Bayley III developmental scores >3 std. dev. below mean legal blindness hearing loss requiring hearing aids or cochlear implant 2+ moderate disabilities Of 227 babies eligible for DCC, 166 (73%) received DCC for ≥45 seconds and 61 (27%) did not receive DCC for ≥45 seconds. No differences in gestational age, birth weight, gender, mode of delivery, admission temperature and highest serum bilirubin were found between DCC and immediate clamping (ICC) groups. Scores of illness severity did not differ between the DCC and ICC groups either. No significant difference in the incidence of severe NDI or death was found when babies who received DCC were compared to those who received ICC. Rates of survival without severe NDI were 142 infants out of 166 and 54 out of 61 for DCC and ICC, respectively (P=0.56). Secondary outcomes were also unaffected by DCC. This is the first study to look at 18 month outcomes following DCC. We found that DCC is not associated with improved or worse outcomes compared to ICC. Rates of survival without severe NDI are low in babies eligible for DCC and are not associated with DCC vs. ICC. The causes of NDI are multifactorial and may not be influenced by a single perinatal factor. Our analysis is limited by a small sample size due to the low rate of severe NDI in the cohort.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".