Transfusion-associated necrotizing enterocolitis re-evaluated: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Significant controversy exists surrounding the possible association between recent packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion and the subsequent development of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in infants. Previous studies and meta-analyses reporting a statistically significant association led to a practice change to withhold enteral feeds in the peri-transfusion period in many centers in an effort to prevent NEC; however, results from more recent studies do not support the existence of an association and, thus, question the validity of this practice change. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether exposure to recent PRBC transfusion (defined as within 48 h) is associated with the subsequent development of NEC stage ≥II (Bell's criteria) in infants. METHODS: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to October 7, 2015. A gray literature search was also performed. Studies comparing the risk of NEC in infants exposed and unexposed to recent PRBC transfusion were included. Thirteen studies met eligibility criteria, and 10 (n=15,675 infants) were included in the meta-analysis. Three authors independently extracted data, and meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model. RESULTS: We found a statistically significant 45% reduction in the unadjusted odds of NEC in infants exposed to a recent PRBC transfusion (odds ratio=0.55, 95% confidence interval=0.31-0.98). CONCLUSION: Our results show a protective effect of recent PRBC transfusion on the subsequent development of NEC. The practice of withholding enteral feeds during the peri-transfusion period should be re-evaluated in light of these results.
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 | 0.016 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".