English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Our primary objective for this follow-up study was to compare the neurodevelopmental outcomes of a surviving cohort of infants using a split-week gestational model (early versus late) gestational age (GA) and the standard completed GA categorization. Neurodevelopmental outcomes using a split-week GA model defined as early (X, 0-3) and late (X, 4-6), with X being 23-26 weeks GA, were compared to outcomes using completed weeks GA. In total, 1012 infants were included in the study. Statistically significant differences were noted in outcomes between the early and late split of the gestational week at 23 weeks (early vs. late), with 13.3% vs. 54.5% for no neurodevelopmental impairment, and 53.3% vs. 22.7% for significant impairment ( p = 0.034), respectively. There were no differences seen in the split week model for 24, 25, and 26 weeks. A trend towards improved neurodevelopmental outcomes was seen with each increasing gestation week. The split-week model did not provide additional information for pregnancies and infants between 24 and 26 weeks gestation. It did, however, provide information for counsel for infants at 23 weeks gestation, showing benefits in the late versus early half of the week.

Does a Split-Week Gestational Age Model Provide Valuable Information on Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Extremely Preterm Infants?