MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2804343541 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxy054.047

DOES PRETERM INFANTS BORN OUTSIDE TERTIARY PERINATAL CENTRE HAVE AN IMPACT ON NEURODEVELOPMENTAL AND GROWTH OUTCOME AT 36 MONTHS CORRECTED AGE?

2018· article· en· W2804343541 on OpenAlexaffabout
Amuchou Soraisham, Ayman Sheta, Catherine Ringtham, Selphee Tang, Diane Creighton, Leonora Hendson, Abhay Lodha

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChorioamnionitisPediatricsConfoundingRetrospective cohort studyGestational ageLogistic regressionObstetricsCohortPregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Infants born in tertiary perinatal centres (inborn) have higher survival and lower morbidity than outborn infants. However, there is limited information regarding the long term neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes among outborn preterm infants. OBJECTIVES To compare the neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes at 36 months corrected age (CA) between outborn and inborn infants born < 29 weeks. DESIGN/METHODS This is a retrospective cohort study. We included infants born <29 weeks admitted to Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary between January 2000 and December 2012, who had neurodevelopmental(ND) assessment up to 36 months CA. Infants with intrauterine infection, major congenital and chromosomal anomalies were excluded. Our primary outcome was composite of death or neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI). We compared ND and growth outcomes between inborn and the outborn infants using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS Of 1235 eligible infants, 175 (14%) were outborn. Outborn infants were lower in GA (25.8 ± 1.7 wk vs 26.2 ± 1.5 wk), had lower chorioamnionitis rate (15% vs 24%), received less antenatal steroid (55% vs 90%) and maternal antibiotics (51% vs 68%). Neonatal morbidities were similar between the two groups except that outborn infants had higher rates of severe brain injury (24% vs 12%) and mortality (22% vs 11%). Of 1078 eligible survivors, 1048 (97%) were followed. There was no difference in ND outcomes (Table). Multivariate regression analysis controlling for potential confounders (GA, gender, chorioamnionitis, antenatal steroids and maternal age) showed outborn status was not associated with composite primary outcome of death or ND impairment (adjusted OR: 1.09, 95% CI, 0.69, 1.70). Growth outcomes were not significantly different between two groups. CONCLUSION In this cohort, neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes does not appear to be significantly different between outborn and infants at 36 months corrected age.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.326 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research→French-language works237,207→