MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155999659 · doi:10.1016/s2352-4642(21)00026-2

Feeding during neonatal therapeutic hypothermia, assessed using routinely collected National Neonatal Research Database data: a retrospective, UK population-based cohort study

2021· article· en· W3155999659 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Gale, Nicholas T. Longford, Dusha Jeyakumaran, Kayleigh Ougham, Cheryl Battersby, Shalini Ojha, Jon Dorling

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
FundersHealth Technology Assessment ProgrammeDepartment of Health and Social CareMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineHypothermiaPediatricsRetrospective cohort studyNecrotizing enterocolitisPopulationCohort studyCohortEnterocolitisNeonatal intensive care unitDatabaseSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic hypothermia is standard of care in high-income countries for babies born with signs of hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy, but optimal feeding during treatment is uncertain and practice is variable. This study aimed to assess the association between feeding during therapeutic hypothermia and clinically important outcomes. METHODS: We did a population-level retrospective cohort study using the UK National Neonatal Research Database. We included all babies admitted to National Health Service neonatal units in England, Scotland, and Wales between Jan 1, 2010, and Dec 31, 2017, who received therapeutic hypothermia for 72 h or died during this period. For analysis, we created matched groups using propensity scores and compared outcomes in babies who were fed versus unfed enterally during therapeutic hypothermia. The primary outcome was severe necrotising enterocolitis, either confirmed at surgery or causing death. Secondary outcomes include pragmatically defined necrotising enterocolitis (a recorded diagnosis of necrotising enterocolitis in babies who received at least 5 consecutive days of antibiotics while also nil by mouth during their neonatal unit stay), late-onset infection (pragmatically defined as 5 consecutive days of antibiotic treatment commencing after day 3), survival to discharge, measures of breastmilk feeding, and length of stay in neonatal unit. FINDINGS: 6030 babies received therapeutic hypothermia, of whom 1873 (31·1%) were fed during treatment. Seven (0·1%) babies were diagnosed with severe necrotising enterocolitis and the number was too small for further analyses. We selected 3236 (53·7%) babies for the matched feeding analysis (1618 pairs), achieving a good balance for all recorded background variables. Pragmatically defined necrotising enterocolitis was rare in both groups (incidence 0·5%, 95% CI 0·2-0·9] in the fed group vs 1·1% [0·7-1·4] in the unfed group). The enterally fed group had fewer pragmatically defined late-onset infections (difference -11·6% [95% CI -14·0 to -9·3]; p<0·0001), higher survival to discharge (5·2% [3·9-6·6]; p<0·0001), higher proportion of breastfeeding at discharge (8·0% [5·1-10·8]; p<0·0001), and shorter neonatal unit stays (-2·2 [-3·0 to -1·2] days; p<0·0001) compared with the unfed group. INTERPRETATION: Necrotising enterocolitis is rare in babies receiving therapeutic hypothermia. Enteral feeding during hypothermia is safe and associated with beneficial outcomes compared with not feeding, although residual confounding could not be completely ruled out. Our findings support starting milk feeds during therapeutic hypothermia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme 16/79/13.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.127
GPT teacher head0.398
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations44
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Child & Adolescent HealthSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207