Phenotyping the Preterm Brain: Characterizing Individual Deviations From Normative Volumetric Development in Two Large Infant Cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The diverse cerebral consequences of preterm birth create significant challenges for understanding pathogenesis or predicting later outcome. Instead of focusing on describing effects common to the group, comparing individual infants against robust normative data offers a powerful alternative to study brain maturation. Here we used Gaussian process regression to create normative curves characterizing brain volumetric development in 274 term-born infants, modeling for age at scan and sex. We then compared 89 preterm infants scanned at term-equivalent age with these normative charts, relating individual deviations from typical volumetric development to perinatal risk factors and later neurocognitive scores. To test generalizability, we used a second independent dataset comprising of 253 preterm infants scanned using different acquisition parameters and scanner. We describe rapid, nonuniform brain growth during the neonatal period. In both preterm cohorts, cerebral atypicalities were widespread, often multiple, and varied highly between individuals. Deviations from normative development were associated with respiratory support, nutrition, birth weight, and later neurocognition, demonstrating their clinical relevance. Group-level understanding of the preterm brain disguises a large degree of individual differences. We provide a method and normative dataset that offer a more precise characterization of the cerebral consequences of preterm birth by profiling the individual neonatal brain.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".