Influence of nutrition provision during the first two weeks of life in premature infants on adolescent body composition and blood pressure.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Adequate nutrition is paramount for premature infants. Longitudinal information is scant on the effects of early nutrition and later growth. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of early energy and protein provision in premature infants on adolescent body composition and blood pressure. METHODS: In 2007-2008 we obtained data from 36 male (12.3±1.7 years) and 25 female (11.5±1.8 years) adolescents born preterm at <34 weeks gestation (range 23-34 weeks) between October 1st 1989 and December 31st 1995 (birth weight <1850 g). The adolescents were divided into groups depending on infant intake mode (enteral vs parenteral), energy provision (<70 kcal/kg/d and ≥70 kcal/kg/d) and protein provision (>2.5 g/kg/d for ≥5 days and >2.5 g/kg/d for <5 days) during the first 14 days of life. RESULTS: After controlling for birth weight and biological maturity, adolescents who received ≥70 kcal/kg/d during infancy were significantly taller (163±11 cm vs. 156±11 cm) and heavier (58±16 kg vs. 49±16 kg) than adolescents who received <70 kcal/kg/d. There were no significant differences in systolic and diastolic BP and total percent body fat between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests that higher infant energy provision appears to be related to adolescent size, it does not appear to contribute to adverse risk factors such as higher systolic BP or increased body fat.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".