MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407023245 · doi:10.3171/2024.10.peds24257

Neurodevelopmental outcomes of permanent and temporary CSF diversion in posthemorrhagic hydrocephalus: a Hydrocephalus Clinical Research Network study

2025· article· en· W4407023245 on OpenAlexaff
Albert M. Isaacs, Chevis N. Shannon, Samuel R. Browd, Jason S. Hauptman, Richard Holubkov, Hailey Jensen, Abhaya V. Kulkarni, Patrick J. McDonald, Michael M. McDowell, Robert P. Naftel, Nichol Nunn, Jonathan Pindrik, Ian F. Pollack, Ron Reeder, Jay Riva-Cambrin, Curtis J. Rozzelle, Brandon G. Rocque, Jennifer M. Strahle, Mandeep S. Tamber, William E. Whitehead, John R. W. Kestle, David D. Limbrick, John C. Wellons

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurosurgery Pediatrics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal and fetal brain pathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of ManitobaBC Children's HospitalUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationUniversity of British ColumbiaHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBayley Scales of Infant DevelopmentHydrocephalusToddlerPediatricsCohort studyCohortSurgeryInternal medicineCognitionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated neurodevelopmental outcomes in preterm neonates with posthemorrhagic hydrocephalus (PHH), focusing on the comparative effectiveness of temporary and permanent CSF diversion strategies. METHODS: This multicenter prospective observational cohort study (2012-2021) involved preterm infants diagnosed with PHH who underwent either initial permanent or temporary CSF diversion. Patients were assessed using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (BSID-III), at 15-30 months and, when possible, at 36-42 months of corrected age. Statistical analyses included univariable and multivariable regression models to examine the associations between BSID-III scores and various treatment and patient factors. RESULTS: Among 106 patients, 15 (14%) underwent initial permanent CSF diversion, while 91 (86%) received temporary diversion. Patients who underwent permanent diversion had lower cognitive scores (58.2 ± 5.7) compared to those temporized (69.0 ± 15.9) (p = 0.01). Temporized patients who later required conversion to permanent diversion demonstrated poorer composite (66.6 ± 18.0 vs 79.9 ± 18.8, p = 0.02), expressive (4.6 ± 3.2 vs 7.0 ± 3.7, p = 0.03), and receptive (4.2 ± 3.3 vs 6.1 ± 3.0, p = 0.04) language scores compared to those weaned from temporary CSF diversion. No significant difference in outcomes was observed between patients temporized with a ventriculosubgaleal shunt versus a ventricular reservoir. Ventricle size at the time of initial CSF diversion was not associated with BSID-III scores. However, univariable analysis showed that a larger ventricle size at the time of conversion to permanent diversion was associated with lower neurodevelopmental scores across all domains. Multivariate analysis, adjusting for intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) grade, complex chronic conditions, and postmenstrual age, revealed that larger ventricle size at the time of conversion correlated negatively with composite motor (effect size -0.47, CI -0.82 to -0.11, p = 0.01) and fine motor (-0.08, CI -0.15 to -0.01, p = 0.03) scores. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggested that the choice between permanent and temporary CSF diversion as initial treatments may affect neurodevelopmental outcomes in preterm neonates with PHH, which are influenced by IVH severity and timing of intervention. The findings support early temporization and avoiding delays to optimize permanent shunting. Monitoring ventricular size closely during this phase is critical, as larger ventricular size at the time of conversion is associated with poorer outcomes. These results highlight the necessity for adapting treatment strategies on the basis of individual patient characteristics, responses, and progress in managing PHH.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 venueJournal of Neurosurgery PediatricsSame topicNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyFrench-language works237,207