MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081389653 · doi:10.1139/bcb-2020-0073

ELFIN, the United Kingdom preterm lactoferrin trial: interpretation and future questions

2020· article· en· W3081389653 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Janet Berrington, William McGuire, Nicholas D. Embleton

Bibliographic record

VenueBiochemistry and Cell Biology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLactoferrinMedicinePlaceboEnteral administrationNecrotizing enterocolitisPediatricsSepsisPopulationClinical trialGestationPremature birthInternal medicinePregnancyParenteral nutritionEnvironmental healthPathologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Results from previous studies have suggested that supplemental bovine lactoferrin (BLF) given to preterm infants (<32 weeks gestation) reduces late-onset sepsis (LOS) and necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). The Enteral Lactoferrin in Neonates (ELFIN) study, performed in the UK, aimed to further address this issue with a well powered double-blind placebo controlled trial of >2200 preterm infants. The results from ELFIN did not demonstrate a reduction in LOS or NEC, or several other clinically important measures. Of the 1093 infants, 316 (29%) in the intervention group developed late-onset sepsis versus 334 (31%) of 1089 in the control group, with an adjusted risk ratio of 0.95 (95% CI = 0.86–1.04; p = 0.233). Reasons for the differences in ELFIN trial results and other studies may include population differences, the routine use of antifungal prophylaxis in the UK, timing of administration of the lactoferrin in relation to disease onset, or specific properties of the lactoferrin used in the different trials. The UK National Institutes for Health Research funded “Mechanisms Affecting the Guts of Preterm Infants in Enteral feeding trials” (MAGPIE) study is further exploring the use of lactoferrin, and the results should be available soon.

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)0.162
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.375
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.856

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1620.375
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0060.001
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiochemistry and Cell BiologySame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207