Efficacy and safety of fenofibrate in combination with phototherapy for the treatment of neonatal hyperbilirubinemia: A systematic review and meta-analyses.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phototherapy is the standard treatment for neonatal jaundice. We aimed to review the efficacy and safety of fenofibrate as an adjunct therapy. Twelve databases were searched and a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Mean change (MC), mean difference (MD), and risk ratios (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the evidence's certainty. Nine randomized trials were included. The MC of total serum bilirubin (mg/dL) was significant at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 h with respective MC (95% CI) values of -0.46 (-0.61, -0.310), -1.10 (-1.68, -0.52), -2.06 (-2.20, -1.91), -2.15 (-2.74, -1.56), and -1.13 (-1.71, -0.55). The FEN + PT group had a shorter duration of phototherapy (MD: -14.36 h; 95% CI: -23.67, -5.06) and a shorter hospital stay (MD: -1.40 days; 95% CI: -2.14, -0.66). There was no significant difference in the risk of complications (RR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.54, 1.46) or the need for exchange transfusion (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.12, 2.81). The certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes. In conclusion, fenofibrate might be a safe adjunct to neonatal phototherapy. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed for the confirmation of these results.
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 | 0.008 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.029 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".