Supine versus Prone Position during Delayed Cord Clamping in Infants ≥36 Weeks: A Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective There is no recommendation in the literature on optimal positioning of the newborn immediately at birth during delayed cord clamping. To evaluate if prone positioning on the mother's chest at birth during delayed cord clamping leads to a higher hematocrit at 30 hours of life compared to supine positioning. Study Design A randomized unblinded trial comparing prone and supine position of the newborn before umbilical cord clamping. Healthy newborns ≥36 weeks gestational age and born vaginally with cephalic presentation were included. The newborn was randomized to prone or supine position. Umbilical cord clamping was delayed in both groups to 1 minute after birth. The primary outcome was hematocrit at 30 hours of life. As a secondary outcome, cerebral tissue oxygenation (CrSO2) values were compared between both groups by near infrared spectroscopy. Results There was no difference in hematocrit at 30 hours of life between supine and prone positions with a mean at 52 and 53.1, respectively, mean difference −1.1 (95% confidence interval:−2.7, 0.5), p = 0.17. Newborns in supine and prone positions had comparable level of CrSO2 at 30 hours of life with a mean at 84.1 and 82.2, respectively, mean difference 1.9 (−0.2, 4.0), p = 0.07. There was no correlation between hematocrit and CrSO2 at 30 hours of life (r = 0.14). Conclusion There was no difference between prone and supine positioning immediately after birth during delayed cord clamping on hematocrit at 30 hours of life. In the absence of clear findings, further studies with assessment of the effect of position on breastfeeding success in the case room, on maternal satisfaction and outcome beyond 30 hours are needed to make adequate recommendations on positioning. Key Points
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".