MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7113743906

Accuracy of Infant Clinical Signs to Predict Young Infant Mortality

2025· article· en· W7113743906 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTachypneaOdds ratioOddsMortality ratePopulationInfant mortalityRespiratory rate
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT 1: Accuracy of Tachypnea to Predict Mortality in Young Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Context: Tachypnea in young infants is commonly used in clinical assessment to identify high-risk infants, however the optimal respiratory rate threshold is unclear. Objective: To systematically review the evidence on the accuracy of different thresholds of tachypnea to predict mortality in infants 0-59 days. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Global Index Medicus, and CENTRAL. Study Selection: Studies reporting the accuracy of tachypnea (≥60, ≥70, or ≥80 breaths per minute (bpm)) to predict mortality in infants 0-59 days. Data Extraction: We followed Cochrane methods for study screening, data extraction, and quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa and QUAPAS scales. Results: Of 7641 studies identified, 8 were included. Tachypnea with threshold of ≥60 bpm had an overall sensitivity of 57% (95% CI: 23%-86%) and specificity of 54% (95% CI: 28%-79%) for predicting future mortality in infants by 59 days of age (6 studies, N = 3819 infants). The pooled odds ratio for the association between tachypnea ≥60 bpm and mortality was 2.00 (95% CI: 1.39-2.87, 7 studies, N = 7122 infants). Tachypnea ≥70 bpm had a 4.6-fold higher odds of mortality (95% CI: 1.60-13.00, 1 study, N = 6924 infants). There was limited data on other thresholds and timing of mortality (early versus late neonatal periods). Limitations: Heterogeneity and the low number of studies limited the evidence. Conclusions: Tachypnea was associated with significantly higher odds of mortality in young infants. Overall sensitivity and specificity were low. Further research is needed to determine the optimal threshold and the accuracy for different postnatal ages. ABSTRACT 2: Accuracy of Infant Clinical Signs to Predict Neonatal Mortality in Rural Bangladesh Background: Clinical signs provide early warning of illness in neonates at high risk of dying in community settings in low- and middle- income countries (LMICs). There is limited validation of current clinical signs and/or algorithms to predict neonatal mortality in LMICs. Objectives: 1) To examine the diagnostic accuracy of existing clinical sign algorithms to predict neonatal mortality, and 2) To determine the association of individual clinical signs with neonatal mortality and their diagnostic accuracy in predicting neonatal death. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a birth cohort in Sylhet, Bangladesh (NCT01572532). Of 7788 live births, 6251 newborns had a clinical examination during a community health worker home visit within 3 days of birth, and 5289 were followed up until 28 days of age with available vital status. We validated existing newborn clinical sign algorithms identified from our prior systematic review (Shafiq 2024), including four Integrated Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI)-like checklist algorithms and the Score of Essential Neonatal Symptoms and Signs (SENSS). We also estimated the odds ratios (ORs) for neonatal mortality associated with individual clinical signs exploring optimal thresholds using univariable logistic regression; and calculated sensitivity and specificity of individual clinical signs for identifying neonatal death. Results: The WHO Young Infant Study 7-sign modification Z checklist algorithm had the sensitivity of 66.7% (95% CI: 56.6% to 75.7%) and specificity of 68.6% (95% CI: 67.3% to 69.9%) for predicting future mortality. The SENSS algorithm had an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 75.9% (95% CI: 69.9% to 82.0%), calibration intercept of -1.21 (95% CI: -1.69 to -0.72), and calibration slope of 0.94 (95% CI: 0.78 to 1.11). Among individual clinical signs at birth, fast breathing ≥80 breaths per minute (bpm), fever ≥38.5˚C, and hypothermia .5˚C showed the strongest association with neonatal death, with ORs were 44.4 (95% CI: 13.8 to 142.6) for fast breathing ≥80 bpm, 39.3 (95% CI: 3.5 to 441.3) for fever ≥38.5˚C, and 30.3 (95% CI: 17.1 to 53.9) for hypothermia .5˚C. Conclusions: Four IMCI-like checklist algorithms had low sensitivity and high specificity to predict neonatal mortality. The Score of Essential Neonatal Symptoms and Signs (SENSS) algorithm reported fair discrimination to identifying neonates at high risk of dying. Further research is needed to optimize clinical sign algorithms to identify high-risk infants in different age groups and settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University)Same topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207