1-Allyl-3-methyl-3′,5′-diphenyl­spiro­[quinoxaline-2(1H),2′(3′H)-[1,3,4]thia­diazole]

In the title spiro compound, C25H22N4S, the planar quinoxaline (r.m.s. deviation = 0.070 Å) and planar thia­diazole (r.m.s. deviation = 0.060 Å) ring systems share a common C atom; their mean planes are aligned at 89.7 (1)°. The thia­zole ring possesses two aromatic ring substituents and is nearly coplanar with these rings [the dihedral angles between the thia­diazole and phenyl rings are 5.7 (1) and 10.7 (1)°]. The allyl unit is disordered over two positions in a 0.65 (1):0.35 (1) ratio

1-Benzyl-3-methyl-3′,5′-diphenyl­spiro­[quinoxaline-2(1H),2′(3′H)-1,3,4-thia­diazole]

In the title spiro compound, C29H24N4S, the quinoxaline and thia­diazole ring systems share a common C atom; their mean planes are aligned at 87.0 (1)° in one mol­ecule and at 84.1 (1)° in the other independent mol­ecule. The thia­zole ring possesses two aromatic ring substituents and is roughly coplanar with these rings [the dihedral angles between the thia­diazole and phenyl rings are 10.7 (1) and 11.7 (1)° in one mol­ecule, and 16.8 (1) and 17.7 (1)° in the other]. The aromatic ring of the benzyl unit of one mol­ecule is disordered over two orientations in a 1:1 ratio

3-{2-[(3-Phenyl­quinoxalin-2-yl)­oxy]ethyl}-1,3-oxazolidin-2-one

The asymmetric unit of the title compound, C19H17N3O3, consists of two independent mol­ecules that are disposed about a pseudo-centre of inversion. The plane of the phenyl substituent is twisted by 38.1 (1)° [43.6 (1)° in the second mol­ecule] out of the plane of the quinoxaline ring system. The five-membered ring of the substituent at the 2-position adopts an envelope conformation; the 5-CH2 atom representing the flap lies out of the plane defined by the other four atoms [deviation 0.264 (7) Å in the first mol­ecule and 0.291 (6) Å in the second]. The dihedral angle between the five-membered ring and the 4-phenyl ring is 84.9 (1)° while that between the five-membered ring and the 5-phenyl ring is 65.6 (1)°

3-[2-(1H-Benzimidazol-2-ylsulfan­yl)eth­yl]-1,3-oxazolidin-2-one

In the title compound, C12H13N3O2S, the oxazolidin ring displays an envelope conformation. The dihedral angle between the benzimidazole ring and the 1,3-oxazolidin-2-one mean plane is 69.85 (13)°. In the crystal, mol­ecules are linked by inter­molecular N—H⋯N hydrogen bonds, forming a chain parallel to the b axis

3-[2-(3-Methyl-2-oxo-1,2-dihydro­quinoxalin-1-yl)eth­yl]oxazolidin-2-one

The title heterocyclic compound, C14H15N3O3, is a new synthetic mol­ecule containing oxazolidine and quinoxaline rings. It is built up from two fused six-membered rings linked to a five-membered oxazolidin-2-one ring by a C2 chain. Both ring systems are essentially planar [maximum deviation = 0.894 (3) Å, r.m.s. deviation = 0.0043 Å]. The structure is held together by van der Waals forces [electrostatic interactions between dipoles, O⋯C = 3.002 (2) Å] between mol­ecules and by weak π–π stacking between symmetry-related mol­ecules, with an inter­planar distance of 3.579 Å and a centroid–centroid distance of 3.800 (1) Å. Inter­molecular C—H⋯O hydrogen bonds are also observed in the crystal structure

3-[2-(3-Methyl­quinoxalin-2-yl­oxy)eth­yl]-1,3-oxazolidin-2-one

Two isomers were isolated during the reaction between 3-methyl­quinoxalin-2-one and bis­(2-chloro­ethyl)amine hydro­chloride. The crystal structure of one isomer has already been reported [Caleb, Bouhfid, Essassi & El Ammari (2009). Acta Cryst. E65, o2024–o2025], while that of the second isomer is the subject of this work. The title compound, C14H15N3O3, has a new structure containing oxazolidine and quinoxaline rings linked by an eth­oxy group. The main difference between the two isomers is the position of the oxazolidine group with respect to the quinoxaline system. The dihedral angle between the fused planar rings and the oxazolidin-2-one ring is 41.63 (8)° in the title mol­ecule

A comparative analysis of APGAR score and the gold standard in the diagnosis of birth asphyxia at a tertiary health facility in Kenya.

BackgroundBirth asphyxia is a consistent key contributor to neonatal morbidity and mortality, notably in sub-Saharan Africa. The APGAR score, though a globally used diagnostic tool for birth asphyxia, remains largely understudied especially in resource-poor settings.ObjectiveThis study determined how effectively the APGAR score is used to diagnose birth asphyxia in comparison to the gold standard (umbilical cord blood pH MethodsUsing a quantitative cross-sectional hospital-based design, term babies born in MTRH who weighed ≥2500g were randomly and systematically sampled; and healthcare providers who assign APGAR scores were enrolled via a census. Umbilical cord blood was drawn at birth and at 5minutes for pH analysis. APGAR scores assigned by healthcare providers were recorded. Effective use of the APGAR score was determined by sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values. At a significance level of 0.05, multiple logistic regression analysis identified the independent provider-associated factors affecting ineffective use of the APGAR score.ResultsWe enrolled 102 babies, and 50 (49%) were females. Among the 64 healthcare providers recruited, 40 (63%) were female and the median age was 34.5years [IQR: 31.0, 37.0]. Assigned APGAR scores had a sensitivity of 71% and specificity of 89%, with positive and negative predictive values of 62% and 92% respectively. Healthcare provider factors associated with ineffective APGAR score use included: instrumental delivery (OR: 8.83 [95% CI: 0.79, 199]), lack of access to APGAR scoring charts (OR: 56.0 [95% CI: 12.9, 322.3]), and neonatal resuscitation (OR: 23.83 [95% CI: 6.72, 101.99]).ConclusionAssigned APGAR scores had low sensitivity and positive predictive values. Healthcare provider factors independently associated with ineffective APGAR scoring include; instrumental delivery, lack of access to APGAR scoring charts, and neonatal resuscitation