MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288747418 · doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2022.101597

Long-term expiratory airflow of infants born moderate-late preterm: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4288747418 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Cassidy Du Berry, Christopher Nesci, Jeanie L.Y. Cheong, Tara L FitzGerald, Rheanna Mainzer, Sarath Ranganathan, Lex W. Doyle, Elianne J.L.E. Vrijlandt, Liam Welsh

Bibliographic record

VenueEClinicalMedicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilCentre of Research Excellence in Newborn Medicine, Murdoch Children's Research InstituteTerveyden ja hyvinvoinnin laitosNational Health and Medical Research CouncilSchool of Medicine, Johns Hopkins UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityState Government of VictoriaUniversity of BernMcGill UniversityInselspital, Universitätsspital Bern
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisTerm (time)PediatricsIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Moderate-late preterm (MLP; 32 to <37 weeks' gestation) birth is associated with reduced expiratory airflow during child, adolescent and adult years. However, some studies have reported only minimal airflow limitation and hence it is unclear if clinical assessment in later life is warranted. Our aim was to compare maximal expiratory airflow in children and adults born MLP with term-born controls, and with expected norms. Methods: of September 2021. A meta-analysis of eligible studies was conducted using a random effects model. The study protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD #42021281518). Findings: : -0.33 [-0.54 to -0.20] 94.7%. Interpretation: Those born MLP had worse expiratory airflows than those born at term, and compared with norms, although reductions were modest. Clinicians should be aware that children and adults born MLP may be at higher risk of obstructive lung disease compared with term-born peers. Funding: This work is supported by grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council (Centre of Research Excellence #1153176, Project grant #1161304); Medical Research Future Fund (Career Development Fellowship to J.L.Y Cheong #1141354) and from the Victorian Government's Operational Infrastructure Support Programme. C. Du Berry's PhD candidature is supported by the Melbourne Research Scholarship and the Centre of Research Excellence in Newborn Medicine.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0290.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.340
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEClinicalMedicineSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207