MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406741702 · doi:10.1016/j.jpeds.2025.114476

Data Collection Variability Across Neonatal Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy Registries

2025· article· en· W4406741702 on OpenAlexaff
Eric S. Peeples, Ulrike Mietzsch, Eleanor J. Molloy, Gabrielle deVeber, Khorshid Mohammad, Janet S. Soul, Danielle Guez‐Barber, Betsy Pilon, Vann Chau, Sonia L. Bonifacio, Jehier Afifi, Alexa Craig, Pia Wintermark

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Pediatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryDalhousie UniversityHospital for Sick ChildrenMontreal Children's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsMedicineEncephalopathyHypoxic Ischemic EncephalopathyEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To assess variability among data elements collected among existing neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) data registries worldwide and to determine the need for future harmonization of standard common data elements. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study of data elements collected from current or recently employed HIE registry data forms. Registries were identified by literature search and email inquiries to investigators worldwide. Data elements were categorized by group consensus. RESULTS: A total of 1281 data elements were abstracted from 22 registries based in 14 countries, including 3 middle-income countries. Registries had a median of 106.5 distinct data elements per registry (range 59-458). The most commonly collected data were related to pregnancy, therapeutic hypothermia, and short-term hospital outcomes. The least consistently collected data were laboratory values other than acid/base status values. Only 4 variables were consistently collected in every registry. Five registries included neurodevelopmental follow-up fields and 5 others linked their data to a separate follow-up registry. CONCLUSION: Many HIE registries are collecting patient data around the world, but there is considerable variability in the number, type, and format of data collected. Future attempts to develop standard common data elements to harmonize data collection globally will be crucial to facilitate worldwide collaboration and to optimize management and outcome of neonatal HIE.

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)0.135
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.246
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 score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.715

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1350.246
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PediatricsSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207