MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W8942200 · doi:10.1159/000480987

Use of Metoclopramide in Preterm Infants

2019· article· en· W8942200 on OpenAlexaff
Koravangattu Sankaran, Emmanual Yeboah, William Bingham, Abraham Ninan

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Pharmacology and Therapeutics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInfant Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetoclopramideMedicineVomitingGestational ageRegurgitation (circulation)AnesthesiaGastric emptyingGestationBirth weightGastroenterologyPregnancyInternal medicineStomach

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6 preterm infants with birth weights ranging from 790 to 1,040 g and gestational ages of 26-35 weeks were given metoclopramide at a mean postnatal age of 35 days. The infants were selected only after fulfilling rigid clinical criteria. All infants were spontaneously breathing and were on parenteral nutrition with 3% Vamin and 10% Neutralipid. Metoclopramide, 0.1 mg/kg/day, was given intravenously in three divided doses. Progress was monitored using abdominal girth, gastric residual aspirate before each feed, intestinal transit times, daily weight gain, number of episodes of vomiting or regurgitation and assessment of tolerance to increasing amounts of feeds. Excellent response was seen in all infants. Withdrawal of the drug led to prompt recurrence of all symptoms and signs which again disappeared on reinstitution of the medication. No untoward side-effects were noted during the administration of the drug. We conclude that, in selected cases, metoclopramide may be used for persistent functional feeding intolerance and gastric stasis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopmental Pharmacology and TherapeuticsSame topicInfant Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207