Cardiovascular Pharmacological Support Among Preterm Infants in Chinese Referral Center Neonatal Intensive Care Units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To describe cardiovascular pharmacological support in infants born at <34 weeks' gestation within the first postnatal week in Chinese neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Design: A secondary analysis of data from a multicenter randomized controlled study (REIN-EPIQ). A questionnaire regarding cardiovascular support practices was also completed by all participating NICUs. Setting: Twenty-five tertiary hospitals from 19 provinces in China. Patients: All infants born at <34 weeks' gestation and admitted to participating NICUs within the first postnatal week from May 2015 to April 2018 were included. Infants who were discharged against medical advice were excluded. Measures and Main Results: Among the 26,212 preterm infants <34 weeks, 16.1% received cardiovascular pharmacological support. The use rates increased with decreasing gestational age and birth weight, with 32.5% among infants <28 weeks and 35.9% among infants <1,000 g. Cardiovascular pharmacological support was independently associated with higher risks of death (aOR 2.8; 95% CI 2.4–3.3), severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) (aOR 2.1; 95% CI 1.8–2.5) and bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) (aOR 2.2; 95% CI 2.0–2.5). Overall 63.1% courses of cardiovascular pharmacological support were >3 days. Prolonged cardiovascular pharmacological support (>3 days) was independently associated with lower rates of survival without morbidity in very-low-birth-weight infants, compared with infants with shorter durations. Dopamine was the most commonly used cardiovascular agent. The cardiovascular pharmacological support rates varied from 1.9 to 65.8% among the participating NICUs. Conclusions: The rate of cardiovascular pharmacological support within the first postnatal week was high with prolonged durations in Chinese NICUs. Marked variation in cardiovascular support existed among participating NICUs. Cardiovascular pharmacological support during the early postnatal period, especially prolonged, may be associated with adverse neonatal outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration: The original trial was registered as “Reduction of Infection in Neonatal Intensive Care Units using the Evidence-based Practice for Improving Quality” (ID: NCT02600195) on clinicaltrials.gov . https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02600195?term=NCT02600195&draw=2&rank=1 .
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".