MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006943476 · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1702939

Predictors of Long-Term Neurodevelopmental Outcome of Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy Treated with Therapeutic Hypothermia

2020· review· en· W3006943476 on OpenAlexafffund
Ipsita Goswami, M Guillot, Emily Tam

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Neurology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsMedicineHypothermiaHypoxic Ischemic EncephalopathyEncephalopathyIntensive care medicineNeonatal encephalopathyIntervention (counseling)NeuroimagingPerinatal asphyxiaPediatricsAnesthesiaInternal medicineAsphyxiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) is a manifestation of perinatal asphyxial insult that continues to evolve over days to weeks following the initial injury. Therapeutic hypothermia has demonstrated that a proportion of this secondary brain injury may indeed be preventable. However, therapeutic hypothermia has also altered the prognostic utility of many bedside tools that are commonly used as predictors of long-term neurodevelopmental outcome in HIE. Clinicians are often confronted with uncertainty when assessing the prognosis of infants with HIE. Improved understanding of the implications and limitations of individual investigations may inform clinical decisions and allow for timely intervention. This review summarizes the predictive value of currently available prognostic markers in HIE infants in the therapeutic hypothermia era, including clinical, biochemical, neurophysiological, physiological, and neuroimaging predictors.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations26
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in NeurologySame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207