MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4229072560 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxac024

A preterm infant with abnormal movements

2022· article· en· W4229072560 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Casalino, Madeleine Murphy, Estelle B. Gauda

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSick childMedicineNeonatologyPediatricsLibrary scienceFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A preterm female neonate is born to a 31-year-old gravida 1 para 0 mother at 33 + 4/7 weeks of gestation via spontaneous vaginal delivery at a community hospital. Her mother received routine antenatal care, with protective serologies and normal prenatal ultrasounds. The pregnancy was complicated by an antepartum hemorrhage at 28 weeks of gestation, and she received a course of steroids. The mother’s medical history includes fibromyalgia treated with 60 mg of duloxetine daily for the duration of the pregnancy. At birth, the newborn had hypotonia of all four limbs and poor respiratory effort. Positive pressure ventilation was given for 2 min. The infant was then placed on continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) of 5 cmH2O at an FiO2 of 90% which was weaned to 40% after stabilization with an SpO2 of 92%. Apgar scores were 2, 5, and 9 at 1, 5, and 10 min, respectively. At 10 min of life, she had bilateral extension and internal rotation of both arms, apnea with desaturations, cycling movements of the lower limbs, and episodes of jitteriness. Cord arterial blood gas showed pH 7.09, pCO2 73, bicarbonate 16, and base excess of −9. Cord venous blood gas showed pH 7.14, pCO2 59, bicarbonate 16, and base excess −10.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicNeuroscience of respiration and sleep→French-language works237,207→