MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386379273 · doi:10.3389/fped.2023.1238402

Impact of level of neonatal care on phlebotomy and blood transfusion in extremely low birthweight infants: a prospective, multicenter, observational study

2023· article· en· W4386379273 on OpenAlexaff
Ratchada Kitsommart, Anchalee Limrungsikul, Numtip Tongsawang, Nirucha Thamwiriyakul, Areeya Deesomchok, Nuttanan Pithakton, Bosco Paes

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pediatrics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Health and Biochemistry
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhlebotomyPercentileObservational studyPediatricsLow birth weightIntensive careProspective cohort studyBirth weightNecrotizing enterocolitisNeonatal intensive care unitAnemiaInternal medicinePregnancyIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives To explore the level of neonatal care on cumulative phlebotomy loss (cPL) and red cell transfusions in extremely low birthweight [ELBW; birthweight (BW) <1,000 g] infants, up to 40 weeks post-conceptual age (PCA). The secondary objective was to determine the associations between cPL and number of transfusions and between transfusions and hospital outcomes. Methods A prospective, comparative, observational study was conducted in two level IV and two level III neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in Thailand. Daily cPL volume and number of blood tests were recorded. Descriptive data are reported as frequency and percentage for categorical variables and median [25th percentile (P25), 75th percentile (P75)] for continuous data according to the data distribution. A p -value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results 210 ELBW infants were included; 99 and 111 were admitted to level IV and level III NICUs, respectively. Birth weight of level IV infants was lower 780.0 [660.0, 875.0] vs. 865.0 [723.0, 930.0] g; p < 0.001]. Initial group hematocrits were similar (43.1% vs. 44.0%, p = 0.47). cPL for each infant was 28.1 [16.5, 46.4] ml. Level IV infants had more tests ( n = 89 [54, 195] vs. 59 [37, 88], p < 0.001). Counterintuitively, there was a lower cPL trend in level IV infants, but this was insignificant (19.6 [12.3, 52.3] vs. 28.9 [19.3, 45.3] ml; p = 0.06). The number of transfusions in both NICUs was similar 4 [2, 6], with a strong correlation between cPL and number of transfusions ( r = 0.79, p < 0.001). Transfusions were significantly associated with bronchopulmonary dysplasia [BPD; adjusted RR (95% CI): 2.6 (1.2, 5.3), p = 0.01]. Conclusions Level IV NICUs conducted more blood tests in ELBW infants without a difference in cPL, and number of transfusions. Cumulative PL correlated with number of transfusions and was associated with BPD risk. Minimizing cPL by point-of-care tests and restrictive transfusion criteria, may reduce need for transfusion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.281 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PediatricsSame topicNeonatal Health and BiochemistryFrench-language works237,207