Association between newborn screening analytes and hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) is a major cause of neonatal mortality and morbidity. Our study sought to examine whether patterns of newborn screening analytes differed between infants with and without neonatal HIE in order to identify opportunities for potential use of these analytes for diagnosis in routine clinical practice. We linked a population-based newborn screening registry with health databases to identify cases of HIE among term infants (≥37 weeks' gestation) in Ontario from 2010-2015. Correlations between HIE and screening analytes were examined using multivariable logistic regression models containing clinical factors and individual screening analytes (acyl-carnitines, amino acids, fetal-to-adult hemoglobin ratio, endocrine markers, and enzymes). Among 731,841 term infants, 3,010 were diagnosed with HIE during the neonatal period. Multivariable models indicated that clinical variables alone or in combination with hemoglobin values were not associated with HIE diagnosis. Although the model was improved after adding acyl-carnitines and amino acids, the ability of the model to identify infants with HIE was moderate. Our findings indicate that analytes associated with catabolic stress were altered in infants with HIE; however, future research is required to determine whether amino acid and acyl-carnitine profiles could hold clinical utility in the early diagnosis or clinical management of HIE. In particular, further research should examine whether cord blood analyses can be used to identify HIE within a clinically useful timeframe or to guide treatment and predict long-term health outcomes.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".