MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993852537 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxz143

Risk factors for re-hospitalization following neonatal discharge of extremely preterm infants in Canada

2019· article· en· W2993852537 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zakariya Bambala Puthattayil, Thuy Mai Luu, Marc Beltempo, Shannon Cross, Marilyn Ballantyne, Anne Synnes, Prakesh S. Shah, Thierry Daboval, Leonora Hendson, Amber Reichert, Jaya Bodani, Sibasis Daspal, Diane Moddemann, Chukwuma Nwaesei, Sarah McKnight, Kevin Coughlin, Linh Ly, Edmond Kelly, Saroj Saigal, Karen A. Thomas, Paige Church, Ermelinda Pelausa, Mohamed Khairy, Charlotte Demers, Alyssa Morin, Sylvie Bélanger, Roderick Canning, Luis Monterrosa, Hala Makary, Jehier Afifi, Phil Murphy, Charles A. Janeway

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsDr. Everett Chalmers Regional HospitalSaint John Regional HospitalCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecSt. John’s Health Sciences CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeLondon Health Sciences CentreWindsor Regional HospitalHealth Sciences CentreJewish General HospitalChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British ColumbiaSunnybrook Health Science CentreSt. Boniface HospitalKingston General HospitalMount Sinai HospitalHolland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation HospitalRegina General HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioFoothills Medical CentreB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreMcGill University Health CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenVictoria General HospitalIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreHamilton Health SciencesRoyal University HospitalMontreal Children's HospitalMoncton HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineGlenrose Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational ageBronchopulmonary dysplasiaPediatricsNeonatal intensive care unitPremature birthPopulationNecrotizing enterocolitisLogistic regressionObservational studyBirth weightPregnancyEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Survivors of extremely preterm birth are at risk of re-hospitalization but risk factors in the Canadian population are unknown. Our objective is to identify neonatal, sociodemographic, and geographic characteristics that predict re-hospitalization in Canadian extremely preterm neonates. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective observational cohort study that included preterm infants born 22 to 28 weeks' gestational age from April 1, 2009 to September 30, 2011 and seen at 18 to 24 months corrected gestational age in a Canadian Neonatal Follow-Up Network clinic. Characteristics of infants re-hospitalized versus not re-hospitalized are compared. The potential neonatal, sociodemographic, and geographic factors with significant association in the univariate analysis are included in a multivariate model. RESULTS: From a total of 2,275 preterm infants born at 22 to 28 weeks gestation included, 838 (36.8%) were re-hospitalized at least once. There were significant disparities between Canadian provincial regions, ranging from 25.9% to 49.4%. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, factors associated with an increased risk for re-hospitalization were region of residence, male sex, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, necrotizing enterocolitis, prolonged neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stay, ethnicity, Indigenous ethnicity, and sibling(s) in the home. CONCLUSION: Various neonatal, sociodemographic, and geographic factors predict re-hospitalization of extremely preterm infants born in Canada. The risk factors of re-hospitalization provide insights to help health care leaders explore potential preventative approaches to improve child health and reduce health care system costs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207