Long-term outcomes of saline boluses in very preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Normal saline bolus is commonly used in clinical practice for treating hypotension in very preterm infants during resuscitation at an early age despite the paucity of high quality evidence supporting this practice. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of early (<7 days after birth) saline boluses given to very preterm infant (VPI) from 23 to 31 weeks GA. METHOD: This is a population-based cohort analysis of the use of normal saline boluses given to VPI. The outcomes were extracted from the Perinatal Follow-Up Program Database which included all VPI from Halifax County admitted to the NICU at the IWK Health Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada between January 2006 to December 2010. We excluded infants with major congenital anomalies and those not offered resuscitation in the delivery room. Our primary outcome was the composite of death or disability by 18-36 months while secondary outcomes were neonatal death, BPD, CP, IVH, PVL, ROP, BSITD III (Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development®, Third Edition) Cognitive, Motor and Language score. RESULTS: Death or disability in those who received saline bolus occurred in 15 (53.6%) compared with 9 (32.1%) in non saline group. Significantly higher rates of CP (p = 0.04), lower scores on the BSITDIII for motor (p = 0.04) and language scales (p = 0.03) were noted for infants who received saline boluses. Cognitive scores approached significance (p = 0.05) with lower scores in the saline bolus group. CONCLUSION: Significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of long term neurodevelopmental outcome and one of the short-term outcome (i.e. BPD). Given the limitations of this retrospective study and the small sample size, a larger cohort from Canadian Neonatal Network database is warranted to evaluate the effects of using normal saline boluses during early life on neurodevelopmental.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".