Examination for Retinopathy of Prematurity in Premature Neonates and Feeding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) affecting developing retinal blood vessels in premature neonates may lead to poor visual activity or blindness. ROP occurs in 50% of neonates and 8% develop severe ROP, requiring treatment. Eye drops for dilating the pupils for examination of the eyes can be absorbed and consequently impair gut motility. Eye examinations may be associated with pain and adverse physiological effects including apnea, which cause parental distress. Objective: To examine the relationship between feeding intolerance 24 hours before and after eye examination for ROP. Method: Retrospective audit was conducted in preterm infants undergoing ROP examination. Feeding intolerance and apnea were observed 24 hours before and 24 hours after eye examination. Results: A total of 18 infants (mean birth gestational age=25.4weeks ±1.5 weeks, mean birth weight=799g ±290g) with 57 eye examinations were included. We observed a significant increase in feeding intolerance in the form of pre-feed aspirate after eye examination (5.2% versus 23%) and suspension of feed (0% versus 5.2%). Two infants were kept nil per oral following eye examination. Conclusion: Eye examination for ROP screening was associated with feeding intolerance in preterm neonates. * Indicates faculty mentor
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".