Erythropoietin in perinatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Erythropoietin (EPO) appears to confer neuroprotection to the injured brain. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have demonstrated its safety in neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE); however, the evidence is unclear. The objective of this study was to examine the role of EPO in perinatal HIE by a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Database search included Embase, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). RCTs reporting a death, neurodevelopmental outcomes or brain injury were included. Two authors extracted the data independently from included studies and assessed the level of evidence (LOE). Results Six RCTs (EPO=5 and darbepoetin α=1) involving 454 neonates were included. A trend toward a lower risk of death was identified in infants treated with EPO [EPO with or without hypothermia: five RCTs, 368 participants, relative risk (RR) 0.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47-1.19, LOE-low; EPO without hypothermia: four RCTs, 318 participants, RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.49-1.32, LOE-low]. EPO treatment without hypothermia compared to placebo resulted in a reduced risk of cerebral palsy (two RCTs, 230 participants, RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.27-0.80, LOE-moderate) and moderate to severe cognitive impairment (two RCTs, 226 participants, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.85, LOE-moderate). A reduced risk of brain injury was identified in EPO treated infants (EPO with or without hypothermia, two RCTs, 148 participants, RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.92, LOE-moderate). Conclusion EPO administration in neonates with perinatal HIE reduces the risk of brain injury, cerebral palsy and cognitive impairment. The evidence is limited to suggest its role as an adjuvant to hypothermia. Larger powered trials are underway to overcome this limitation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".