MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762368536 · doi:10.1093/pch/19.6.e35-69

71: Impact of a Novel Predictive Model for Early-Onset Neonatal Sepsis Evaluation

2014· article· en· W2762368536 on OpenAlexaffabout
James Haiyang Xu, K Dow

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and Maternal Infections
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePediatricsGestational ageRetrospective cohort studySepsisNeonatal sepsisCohortRupture of membranesAsymptomaticMultivariate analysisObstetricsPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multivariate risk model proposed by Puopolo et al (Pediatrics 2011;128(5):e11655–1163) has been shown to identify 35% fewer asymptomatic infants born at ≥ 36 weeks in a single maternity center as high risk for early onset neonatal sepsis (EOS) when compared with standard algorithms. (Mukhopadhyay et al E-PAS2013:3355.6) To retrospectively examine the number of infants assessed and treated for EOS using local guidelines in a Canadian neonatal unit in comparison with the numbers that would have been assessed by using the quantitative multivariate risk model of Puopolo et al. Retrospective cohort study of infants born at ≥34 weeks gestational age (GA) admitted to a Canadian NICU, between July 2012 and June 2013. The cohort, which includes infants admitted to the NICU for a variety of clinical and child welfare reasons, was first stratified into high- and low-risk groups according to the risk calculated by the model of Puopolo et al. This model uses GA highest maternal intrapartum temperature, duration of rupture of membranes, maternal group B Strep status as well as timing and type of intrapartum antibiotics to calculate a risk. A value of ≥0.5 per 1000 live births was used to define high risk and therefore the threshold for assessment and treatment. The numbers who were investigated (CBC, blood culture, or CSF culture) and/or treated for EOS within each group were then identified. 89.5% (239 of 267) of infants were calculated as being low risk while 10.5% (28 of 267) were high risk, with the mean risk scores being 0.12±0.01 (95% CI 0.0 to 0.47) and 1.68±0.91 (95% CI 0.52 to 13.19), respectively. Within the low risk group, 130 of 239 (54%) were investigated for EOS, while 31 of 239 (13%) received antibiotics. Within the high risk group, 18 of 28 (64%) were investigated with only two of 28 (7%) also being treated for EOS. There were no differences in the mean risk scores in the high risk group between those who were investigated and those who were not. The scores of the two patients in the high risk group who received antibiotics were 13.19 and 0.94, and the mean score of those who did not was 1.26±0.39 (95% CI 0.52 to 4.47). In total, 148 of 267 (55.4%) of infants were investigated for EOS in this cohort based on clinical judgement. No cases of EOS as defined by a positive blood or CSF culture were identified during this period. Use of the Puopolo et al. neonatal sepsis predictive model for evaluation of EOS would have resulted in 81% fewer infants investigated. Costs associated with the investigations and treatment and potential cost savings of using this model are currently being evaluated. Prospective study is needed to further evaluate the practical impact of this predictive instrument on EOS identification and associated cost savings in Canadian NICUs.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicNeonatal and Maternal InfectionsFrench-language works237,207