126 BRUE and evaluation of higher-risk infants with overnight oximetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Primary Subject area Hospital Paediatrics Background BRUE (Brief resolved unexplained event) is a worrisome event for parents. Investigation guidelines for infants 2 months and older have been published, but an evaluation framework for higher-risk infants is still evolving. Objectives The goal of this study is to determine if an overnight oximetry for patients presenting with BRUE under the age of the 2 months would help to target patients at higher risk of recurrent BRUE. The secondary goals are to evaluate the characteristics of those infants, the rate of recurrence of BRUE and to evaluate the effectiveness of other investigations. Design/Methods This was an observational retrospective study of infants presenting with BRUE between the age of 7 days and 60 days between January 1 2010 and October 1 of 2018. Patients were selected if they matched the definition of BRUE defined by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2016. Patient demographics and antecedents, characteristics of the events, investigations results, recurrence of BRUE, and hospitalizations until the age of 1 year were recorded. Results 103 patients presented with BRUE under the age of 2 months. Of those, 63 (61.2%) were boys. Only four (3.9%) had a recurrence of BRUE. The mean corrected age at the presentation was 20.7 days. Thirty-three (32%) infants had an overnight oximetry; of those 19 (18.4%) had an abnormal result. An abnormal overnight oximetry result was associated with a lower risk of recurrent BRUE (0%) compared to infants without an oximetry (4.3%) or with a negative result (7.1%) (p=0.6195). 68.4% of patients with an abnormal overnight oximetry had received medical treatment (caffeine, oxygen or anti-acid), which was significantly higher than those with normal overnight oximetry (14.3%) or no oximetry (9.4%) (p < 0.0001). There was an association between male sex and abnormal overnight oximetry (p=0.0137). No other investigation was able to predict a higher risk of recurrent BRUE among those evaluated. Conclusion In our cohort, boys were more frequently affected and had a higher rate of abnormal overnight oximetry. One hypothesis is that BRUE under 2 months of age might be a presentation mode for immature respiratory control and boys might be at higher risk for such events. Even though an abnormal result was present in 18.4% of the overnight oximetry, this investigation was not able to identify infants at higher risk of recurrent BRUE. This could be partly explained by the fact that a recurrent BRUE is a rare event and that a majority of patients with abnormal overnight oximetry were treated medically, which might have prevented recurrence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".