Parent-reported health outcomes at preschool age in preterm survivors: a population-based cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Literature on health status (HS) and health-related quality of life of preterm survivors at preschool age is sparse. Further, little is known about the relationship between parent-reported HS outcomes and standardised neurodevelopmental outcomes measured in preterm survivors at preschool age. Our objective was to evaluate parent-reported child HS outcomes and their relationship to neurodevelopmental outcomes at 36 months of age in very preterm survivors. DESIGN: Prospective population-based cohort study. SETTING: Perinatal follow-up programme. PATIENTS: Infants <31 weeks' gestational age born from 2014 to 2016. OUTCOME MEASURES: Parents completed the Health Status Classification System for Pre-School Children questionnaire at 36 months. At the same age, neurodevelopmental assessments were completed to determine neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI). NDI was categorised as none, 'mild' or 'significant' (moderate or severe cerebral palsy, Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development - Third Edition <70, blind or required hearing aid). RESULTS: Of 118 children, 87 (73.7%) parents reported their child had an HS concern (mild: 61 (51%); moderate: 16 (13.6%); and severe: 10 (8.5%)). Mild and significant NDIs were observed in 17 (14.4%) and 14 (11.9%) children, respectively. For the 14 (12%) children with significant NDI, 7 (50.0%) parents reported severe and 4 (28.6%) reported moderate concerns. Conversely, for 26 (22%) children with parent-reported moderate to severe concerns, 11 (42.3%) met the criteria for significant NDI. There was a moderate positive correlation between parental concern and NDI status (Spearman correlation=0.46, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Parental HS concerns only moderately correlated with the NDI status. Of the 12% of children with significant NDI, only half of the parents reported severe HS concerns.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".