Use of Probiotics for Preventing Necrotizing Enterocolitis in Preterm Infants: A Survey of Current Practices Among Indian Neonatologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Probiotics are known to reduce the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC≥ Stage II) significantly, as well as all-cause mortality, late-onset sepsis (LOS), and feeding intolerance in preterm infants. Probiotics have been reported to have comparable benefits in high- and low-middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to assess the current practices of neonatologists in India for using probiotics in preterm infants. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A questionnaire created using Survey Monkey's web-based tool was sent to neonatologists in India. Survey forms automatically converted responses into Excel files (Microsoft® Corp., Redmond, WA). Data were analyzed using SPSS (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). RESULTS: A total of 615 responses were received from various neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) in India (Level I: 43 (7%), II: 124 (20.8%), III: 448 (72.8%)). Around 431 (70%) of the units had either National Neonatology Forum (NNF) accreditation or IAP fellowships or were affiliated with private or government medical colleges. The remaining 184 (30%) were in private setups. Routine probiotic supplementation (RPS) was provided in 241 (39.1%) of the responding units; 179 (48%) quoted inadequate evidence as the reason for not providing RPS, 125 (33.43%) quoted difficulty in sourcing safe and effective products, whereas others were concerned about adverse effects. Most centers provided RPS for preterm infants <32 weeks and 1500 g at birth. The clinical practice was influenced by the judgment of the attending clinician. Significant variation was noticed in the protocol for RPS. CONCLUSION: Findings of the survey suggest that approximately 39% of the participating neonatologists in India currently offer RPS for preterm infants. A significant variation exists in the selection of probiotic strains, products, dose, and duration of supplementation. Despite limitations, our findings are useful in guiding clinical practice and further research to optimize the safety and efficacy of RPS for preterm infants.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".