Neuroprotective therapies in the NICU in preterm infants: present and future (Neonatal Neurocritical Care Series)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The survival of preterm infants has steadily improved thanks to advances in perinatal and neonatal intensive clinical care. The focus is now on finding ways to improve morbidities, especially neurological outcomes. Although antenatal steroids and magnesium for preterm infants have become routine therapies, studies have mainly demonstrated short-term benefits for antenatal steroid therapy but limited evidence for impact on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes. Further advances in neuroprotective and neurorestorative therapies, improved neuromonitoring modalities to optimize recruitment in trials, and improved biomarkers to assess the response to treatment are essential. Among the most promising agents, multipotential stem cells, immunomodulation, and anti-inflammatory therapies can improve neural outcomes in preclinical studies and are the subject of considerable ongoing research. In the meantime, bundles of care protecting and nurturing the brain in the neonatal intensive care unit and beyond should be widely implemented in an effort to limit injury and promote neuroplasticity. IMPACT: With improved survival of preterm infants due to improved antenatal and neonatal care, our focus must now be to improve long-term neurological and neurodevelopmental outcomes. This review details the multifactorial pathogenesis of preterm brain injury and neuroprotective strategies in use at present, including antenatal care, seizure management and non-pharmacological NICU care. We discuss treatment strategies that are being evaluated as potential interventions to improve the neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants born prematurely.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".