Cerebral palsy predictive value of 4 months-AIMS in newborns with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim Predicting motor outcomes in hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy (HIE) is challenging. We aimed to assess the value of the four-month Alberta Infant Motor Scale (4M-AIMS) in predicting motor development at 18 months of age. Method A retrospective cohort study was conducted at Sainte-Justine University Hospital Centre (Canada), including patients with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) who underwent therapeutic hypothermia between 2009 and 2016. Neurodevelopmental follow-ups were conducted at two and four months with the AIMS, and motor outcomes were classified at 18 months according to the Gross Motor Function Classification System. Ordinal regression was used to assess the predictive value of AIMS scores and brain MRI for motor outcome. Results Of the 52 newborns included: 16 children (31 %) had normal motor development, 25 (48 %) displayed motor delays, and 11 patients (21 %) had cerebral palsy. Forty-one (79 %) infants had an abnormal 4M-AIMS score (below the 10th percentile). Early brain MRI and 4M-AIMS scores were both predictive of altered motor outcomes (χ 2 = 6.1, p-value = 0.013 and χ 2 = 4.9, p-value = 0.029, respectively). A normal four-month AIMS assessment is considered a reliable indicator for excluding a future cerebral palsy. Interpretation Complementary assessment with brain MRI and 4M-AIMS with a score below the 0th percentile provides accurate prediction of motor outcomes at 18 months. Short title Cerebral Palsy predictive value of AIMS.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it