MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398140301 · doi:10.1002/jpr3.12081

Umbilical arterial catheter duration as risk factor for Bell's Stage III necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm neonates

2024· article· en· W4398140301 on OpenAlexaff
Renjini Lalitha, Matthew Hicks, Mosarrat Qureshi, Kumar Kumaran

Bibliographic record

VenueJPGN Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicInfant Nutrition and Health
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNecrotizing enterocolitisMedicineGestational ageOdds ratioNeonatal intensive care unitBirth weightUnivariate analysisConfidence intervalRisk factorMultivariate analysisInternal medicineGastroenterologyPediatricsPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To explore risk factors for Stage-III necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC-III) in preterm neonates. Methods: This was a retrospective case-control study of neonates born <33 weeks gestational age (GA) who were admitted to a tertiary neonatal intensive care unit, between 2015 and 2018. NEC-III cases were compared with Stage-II NEC (NEC-II) and non-NEC controls. Two to four non-NEC controls were matched by GA ± 1 week and date of birth ± 3 months, to one NEC-III case. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to examine risk factors for NEC-III. Results: = 0.006 for NEC-III versus NEC-II. Rupture of membranes (ROM) >1 week was associated with NEC-III (AOR 6.93; 95% CI [1.56-30.69] vs. non-NEC and AOR 11.74; 95% CI [1.14-120.34] vs. NEC-II). Conclusion: The increased association of NEC-III with duration of UAC and ROM could be further examined in prospective studies, and an upper limit for UAC duration could be considered in NEC prevention bundles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJPGN ReportsSame topicInfant Nutrition and HealthFrench-language works237,207