Outcome of very preterm infants delivered outside tertiary perinatal centers in China: a multi-center cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: To describe the incidence of outborns among very preterm infants (VPIs, <32 weeks of gestation) in Chinese perinatal centers and to examine the association of outborn status with adverse outcomes. Methods: A cohort study enrolling all VPIs admitted to 18 perinatal centers in China from May 1st, 2015 to April 30th, 2018. Neonatal outcomes including rates of discharge against medical advice (DAMA), in-hospital mortality, overall mortality, severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) or periventricular leukomalacia (PVL), sepsis, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) and severe retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) were compared between outborn and inborn infants. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to estimate the independent association of outborn status with neonatal outcomes. Results: Among 12,014 VPIs, 1,991 (16.6%) infants were outborn. Outborn infants had lower Apgar scores and higher illness severity score on admission. Mothers of outborn infants were less likely to receive antenatal steroids, prenatal care and caesarean section. The incidence of DAMA (18.0% vs. 12.5%, P<0.001), overall mortality (19.9% vs. 15.8%, P<0.001) and severe brain injury (10.8% vs. 9.1%, P=0.024) of outborn infants were significantly higher than inborn infants. Outborn status was independently associated with increased risks of DAMA (aOR, 1.6; 95% CI: 1.4–1.8), overall-hospital mortality (aOR, 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1–1.5) and severe IVH/PVL (aOR, 1.2; 95% CI: 1.0–1.5). Conclusions: The incidence of outborn VPIs was high in China. Outborn infants were more likely to be delivered in an uncontrolled situation and were at significantly higher risk of neonatal mortality and severe brain injury compared with inborn infants. Quality improvement efforts are needed to facilitate in-utero transfer of high-risk pregnancies to tertiary centers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".