71 Can a Change in Feeding Practices in VLBW Infants Influence the Incidence of Necrotizing Enterocolitis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To show whether a change in feeding practices in Very Low Birth Weight (VLBW) infants by implementing a feeding protocol can decrease the incidence of Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC) in these infants. Retrospective chart review of all premature infants <1500 g admitted to a level III NICU in the period between Jan 1994-Dec 2003. The incidence of NEC 4 years prior and 5 years after implementing the feeding protocol is reported. Early mortality (1st week of life), NEC requiring surgery, and death due to NEC are also reported. A total of 1710 infants < 1500 g were admitted to the NICU. In the period before and after implementing the Feeding Protocol, the mortality rate was 14.8% & 12.5% and the incidence of NEC was 8.0% & 6.5% respectively. Surgery for NEC was 43.8% & 36% between the two time periods. Death due to NEC was 31.6% before and 34% after Protocol implementation. There was an improvement, not significant, in mortality rate and NEC incidence after protocol implementation. There was a noted decrease in NEC requiring surgery, which could be partially due to more conservative surgical approach i.e. abdominal drain insertion. NEC is a multi-factorial disease that affects primarily the immature gut. Other risk factors besides entral feeding need to be investigated.
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 | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".