MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762872196 · doi:10.1093/pch/19.6.e35-72

74: Umbilical Lines are an Independent Risk Factor for Adverse Outcomes in Very Preterm Babies

2014· article· en· W2762872196 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohamed Sabry Elboraee, Ye Xy, Jennifer Toye, Kumar Kumaran, Keith T. Aziz, Prakesh S. Shah

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNeonatal skin health care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetinopathy of prematurityBronchopulmonary dysplasiaUmbilical arteryNecrotizing enterocolitisGestational agePediatricsUmbilical veinApgar scoreUmbilical cordObstetricsDemographicsPregnancyFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Placement of umbilical arterial and/or venous (UA or UV) lines is a common practice in the care of preterm babies in Canada. It is not, however, clear whether they improve neonatal outcomes To explore the effect of umbilical lines on mortality and morbidities in very preterm babies Data were abstracted from the Canadian Neonatal Network database for babies born at <29 weeks gestational age (GA) from January 2010 to December 2012 (excluding babies who were moribund on admission or with major congenital anomalies). Four groups were identified: Gp0 with no umbilical lines; Gp1 with umbilical venous (UV) lines only; Gp2 with umbilical artery (UA) lines only; and Gp3 with both UA and UV lines. Data fields included demographics, peripartum factors, major inpatient morbidities (nosocomial infection (NI), necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), brain injury (BI) and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP)), and mortality. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to compare the four groups. Of 4623 babies 820 (17.7%) were in Gp0, 1032 (22.3%) in Gp1, 120 (2.6%) in Gp2, and 2651 (57.3%) in Gp3. With increasing number of lines babies were smaller, had lower Apgar scores, were more likely to have high SNAPII scores, and were more likely to be born by Cesarean Section. Univariate analysis showed that babies with no umbilical lines (Gp0) had the lowest mortality and lowest rates of NI, NEC, BPD, BI, and ROP. Increasing from one to two lines also increased rates. After adjustment for risk factors (see table and footnote) babies with no lines had significantly lower rates of a composite outcome of death or major inpatient morbidity - there was no difference in mortality between groups. Similar results were obtained when the model was adjusted for SNAPII instead of Apgar score. Most very preterm babies in Canada get UA and/or UV lines (usually both). Umbilical lines are more likely to be inserted into smaller, sicker babies. However, after adjustment for risk factors and acuity, babies with no umbilical lines are more likely to survive without major morbidity. Adding a second umbilical line appears to increase risk further. Clinical strategies should take into account the inherent risks of UA and/or UV lines. Alternative practices, such as early placement of peripherally inserted central catheters, require further evaluation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.343 · 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 designObservational
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 skin health careFrench-language works237,207