RETRACTED: Effect of antenatal magnesium sulphate on MRI biomarkers of white matter development at term equivalent age: The magnum study
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal). This article has been retracted at the request of all the Authors because an error was detected after publication. On August 25, 2020, eBioMedicine published online findings from a nested cohort study1Effect of antenatal magnesium sulphate on MRI biomarkers of white matter development at term equivalent age: The magnum study. Poppe, Tanya et al. EBioMedicine, Volume 59, 102957.Google Scholarwithin the randomised Magnesium sulphate at 30 to <34 weeks’ Gestational age Neuroprotection Trial (MAGENTA). On November 17, 2021, the authors drew our attention to an error that was discovered when the dataset for the parent randomised trial was being finalised. The original MagNUM analysis was conducted blind to treatment group allocation, and an incorrect code was used at the end of that analysis to identify the magnesium sulphate and placebo study groups. Therefore, the group allocations to the magnesium sulphate and placebo study groups in the paper were inadvertently reversed, making the findings, as reported, unreliable. eBioMedicine editors discussed the corrections that were needed in the paper and decided, in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics’ guidelines, that because of the extent of the changes necessary, the previous version of the Article should be retracted, and a corrected version be republished after reanalysis and rereview. Today we retract the previous version and republish online the corrected version of the article2Effect of antenatal magnesium sulphate on MRI biomarkers of white matter development at term equivalent age: The magnum study. Poppe, Tanya et al. EBioMedicine, DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.103923.Google Scholar DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.103923 in which the results are unchanged apart from the treatment group assignment. The figures and tables have been corrected accordingly, and the overall message has been modified to convey that antenatal magnesium sulphate prior to preterm birth after 30 weeks’ gestation does not promote white matter development in pathways affecting motor and cognitive function. This previous version of the Article has been added to the appendix in the new version and is marked retracted. The Editors of eBioMedicine eBioMedicine, London, EC2Y 5AS, UK Retraction and republication - effect of antenatal magnesium sulphate on MRI biomarkers of white matter development at term equivalent age: The MagNUM StudyOn August 25, 2020, eBioMedicine published online findings from a nested cohort study within the randomised Magnesium sulphate at 30 to <34 weeks’ Gestational age Neuroprotection Trial (MAGENTA). On November 17, 2021, the authors drew our attention to an error that was discovered when the dataset for the parent randomised trial was being finalised. The original MagNUM analysis was conducted blind to treatment group allocation, and an incorrect code was used at the end of that analysis to identify the magnesium sulphate and placebo study groups. Full-Text PDF Open Access
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 | 0.038 | 0.282 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.099 | 0.036 |
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".