Cited by 20Neonatal and fetal brain pathologyInfant Development and Preterm CareThermal Regulation in Medicine

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Early Determination of Prognosis in Neonatal Moderate or Severe Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Early determination of prognosis is important in neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE). Our objective was to test scoring systems developed earlier (original scoring system) and develop new prognostic models. METHODS: Secondary analysis of data from the multicenter randomized controlled trial of longer, deeper, or usual care cooling in neonatal HIE (NCT01192776) that enrolled 364 neonates diagnosed with moderate or severe HIE. The primary outcome was death or moderate or severe disability at 18 to 22 months, and secondary outcome was death during initial hospitalization. Testing of early neurologic clinical examination (<6 hours of age) and the original scoring system for prognostic ability was done, followed by development of new scoring systems and classification and regression tree (CART) models by using early clinical variables (<6 hours of age). RESULTS: For death or disability, the original scoring system correctly classified 75% (95% confidence interval: 69%-81%), whereas the new scoring system correctly classified 78% (73%-82%), and the CART model correctly classified 76% (72%-81%). Early neurologic clinical examination also had a correct classification rate of 76% (71%-80%). Depth and duration of cooling did not affect prediction. Only a few components of the early neurologic examination were associated with poor outcome. For death, the original scoring system correctly classified 72% (66%-77%), the new scoring system 68% (63%-72%), the new CART model 87% (83%-90%), and early neurologic evaluation 81% (77%-85%). CONCLUSIONS: The 3 models (scoring system, CART, and early neurologic evaluation) were comparable in predicting death or disability. For in-hospital death, CART models were superior to scoring systems and early neurologic examination.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2020-048678

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Progress has been made in the detection of death or severe impairment.

    “Progress has been made in the detection of death or severe impairment (7, 8)”

    From Association of the neonatal sequential organ failure assessment score with neurological outcomes in infants diagnosed with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (2026) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Results report improved prediction of in-hospital death with the new CART model and a small improvement in predicting death or moderate or severe disability with the new scoring system. But the Discussion says the models did not improve prediction by a clinically relevant magnitude overall compared with early neurologic examination. The paper also evaluates moderate or severe disability together, not severe impairment alone. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Outcome uncertainty remains for a majority of HIE patients even with the availability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

    “outcome uncertainty remains for a majority of HIE patients even with the availability of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).”

    From Association of the neonatal sequential organ failure assessment score with neurological outcomes in infants diagnosed with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (2026) · cites this paper as [7]

    The Discussion says that neurologic outcomes may remain difficult to predict even with all data available, but it says the magnitude of that uncertainty has not been defined. It proposes MRI biomarkers as a possible way to improve prediction; it does not establish that a majority of HIE patients remain uncertain when MRI is available. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Current predictors of neurodevelopmental impairment, including MRI and early neurologic examination findings such as suck, have recognized limitations, including interobserver variability and incomplete capture of outcome variability by imaging in less severe cases.

    “Current predictors of neurodevelopmental impairment, including MRI and early neurologic examination findings such as suck (7), have recognized limitations, including interobserver variability and incomplete capture of outcome variability by imaging in less severe cases (21).”

    From Association of the neonatal sequential organ failure assessment score with neurological outcomes in infants diagnosed with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (2026) · cites this paper as [7]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 20

Metadata

Authors
Ambalavanan, N., Shankaran, S., Laptook, A. R., Carper, B. A., Das, A., Carlo, W. A., Cotten, C. M., Duncan, A. F., & Higgins, R. D.
Affiliations
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • Wayne State University (US)
  • Women & Infants Hospital of Rhode Island (US)
  • RTI International (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
Corresponding author
Ambalavanan, Namasivayam
Venue
PEDIATRICS
Published
2021-06-01
Volume
147
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-4275
OpenAlex
W3161390102
Cited by
20
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7
FWCI
2.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024128)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (U10HD027880, U10HD068284, U10HD068244, U10HD027904, U10HD027856, U10HD040689, U10HD027871, U10HD027853, U10HD040492, U10HD021364, U10HD034216, U10HD068278, U10HD021373, U10HD036790, U10HD021385, U10HD053109, U10HD053089, UG1HD027904, UG1HD087229, U10HD068263, U10HD027851, UG1HD087226, U24HD095254, U10HD068270)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Neonatal and fetal brain pathology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Development and Preterm Care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Thermal Regulation in Medicine
Keywords
neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, prognosis, prognostic score, in-hospital mortality, neurodevelopmental disorders, outcome prediction
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Male, Neurologic Examination, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome, Hypoxia-Ischemia, Brain, Early Diagnosis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review