Neurodevelopmental Outcomes Following Extensive Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in the Delivery Room for Infants Born <29 Weeks’ Gestational Age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: Neurodevelopmental outcomes of preterm infants who receive extensive CPR (ECPR), defined as chest compression with or without epinephrine in the delivery room, remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: To compare the neurodevelopmental outcomes of preterm infants admitted to Canadian NICUs requiring ECPR versus those who did not require ECPR in the delivery room. DESIGN/METHODS: Preterm infants born at <29 weeks GA between January 1, 2010 and September 30, 2011 and evaluated at CNFUN centers were retrospectively evaluated. The primary outcome was a composite of death or neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) at 18-21 months CA defined as presence of any one or more of the following: definitive cerebral palsy or Bayley- III cognitive, language, motor scores <85 on any one of the components or hearing impairment or visual impairment. Demographic factors, neurodevelopmental status including Bayley III cognitive, language and motor scores and sensory impairments were compared between the ECPR and the no ECPR group using univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Of 2488 eligible infants, 197 (7.9%) received ECPR. 83% of surviving infants had follow-up data. Demographic and outcomes data are summarized below in Table 1 and 2 respectively. CONCLUSION: In very preterm neonates, ECPR was associated with increased risk of death or neurodevelopmental impairment and lower motor scores at 18-21 months CA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".