Predictors of PDA Treatment in Preterm Neonates Who Had Received Prophylactic Indomethacin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify clinical factors those predict the need for patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) treatment in preterm neonates who had received prophylactic indomethacin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Preterm neonates with <28 weeks' gestational age admitted to level III neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Canada between 2010 and 2015 and who had received prophylactic indomethacin were included. Primary outcome was surgical ligation of PDA, while secondary outcomes were any PDA treatment and common neonatal morbidities. RESULTS: Of the 7,024 eligible neonates, 843 (12%) neonates had received prophylactic indomethacin. Of them, 84 neonates (10%) required surgical ligation while 367 neonates (44%) received medical or surgical treatment for PDA. Logistic regression analyses identified gestational age (odds ratio [OR]: 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-0.87) and outborn status (OR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.09-3.93) as predictors for surgical ligation. Maternal hypertension (OR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.37-0.89), rupture of membranes (ROM) ≥24 hours (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.48-0.96), and surfactant treatment (OR: 1.70, 95% CI: 1.09-2.66) were predictors for medical or surgical treatment of PDA. CONCLUSION: In extremely preterm neonates who had received prophylactic indomethacin, gestational age and outborn status were predictors for surgical ligation of PDA, while maternal hypertension, ROM ≥24 hours, and surfactant treatment were associated with the medical or surgical treatment of PDA.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".