The Bayley-III scale may underestimate neurodevelopmental disability after cardiac surgery in infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Neurodevelopmental disability is the most common complication among congenital heart surgery survivors. The Bayley scales are standardized instruments to assess neurodevelopment. The most recent edition (Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development 3rd Edition, Bayley-III) yields better-than-expected scores in typically developing and high-risk infants than the second edition (Bayley Scales of Infant Development 2nd Edition, BSID-II). We compared BSID-II and Bayley-III scores in infants undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: We evaluated 2198 infants who underwent operations with cardiopulmonary bypass between 1996 and 2009 at 26 institutions. We used propensity score matching to limit confounding by indication in a subset of patients (n = 705). RESULTS: Overall, unadjusted Bayley-III motor scores were higher than BSID-II Psychomotor Development Index scores (90.7 ± 17.2 vs 77.6 ± 18.8, P < 0.001), and unadjusted Bayley-III composite cognitive and language scores were higher than BSID-II Mental Development Index scores (92.0 ± 15.4 vs 88.2 ± 16.7, P < 0.001). In the propensity-matched analysis, Bayley-III motor scores were higher than BSID-II Psychomotor Development Index scores [absolute difference 14.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.7-17.6; P < 0.001] and the Bayley-III classified fewer children as having severe [odds ratio (OR) 0.24; 95% CI 0.14-0.42] or mild-to-moderate impairment (OR 0.21; 95% CI 0.14-0.32). The composite of Bayley-III cognitive and language scores was higher than BSID-II Mental Development Index scores (absolute difference 4.0, 95% CI 1.4-6.7; P = 0.003), but there was no difference between Bayley editions in the proportion of children classified as having severe cognitive and language impairment. CONCLUSIONS: The Bayley-III yielded higher scores than the BSID-II and classified fewer children as severely impaired. The systematic bias towards higher scores with the Bayley-III precludes valid comparisons between early and contemporary cardiac surgery cohorts.
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 | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".