MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3049232468

HEART RATE CHANGES ON DAY ONE IN PRETERM INFANTS AND LENGTH OF STAY IN THE NICU: A PILOT STUDY

2008· article· en· W3049232468 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Tan, Aleksandar Jeremić, Y Adbel-Rahman, K Li, Y Li, Arthur Lau

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Disease in Childhood · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational agePediatricsGestationSample size determinationPregnancyStatistics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To investigate if a statistical model of heart rate changes in preterm infants below 32 weeks gestation correlates with illness severity score and NICU LOS. Design/Methods Infants 150 bpm. The data was processed using MATLAB 7.5 (Mathworks, Natick MA) software. The probability of these infants remaining in each state and changing from one state to another was calculated as a Markov chains probability model. SNAP-II, Perinatal Extension, Version II (SNAPPE-II) and Transport Risk Index of Physiologic Stability (TRIPS) scores were calculated. Results 45 infants (21 females) with mean (SD) gestational age of 28.7 (2) weeks, mean (SD) birthweight of 1250 (346) g had a mean (SD) length of stay of 43 (45) days. None of the infants died. The strongest correlations were between length of stay and the change in states from S3–S4 (coefficient 0.52, p = 0.0003), and SNAPPE-II (coefficient 0.54, p = 0.0001). SNAP-II and TRIPS were not significantly correlated to LOS. Conclusions Although the sample size is small, probability modeling using Markov chains could prove promising to correlate LOS with HR variations of preterm infants in the first day of life.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of Disease in ChildhoodSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207