MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W132899748 · doi:10.1093/pch/6.10.744

Persistent fetal circulation

2001· article· en· W132899748 on OpenAlexaff
Chrysal D'cunha, Koravangattu Sankaran

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal University Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypoxia (environmental)HypoxemiaShuntingIntensive careRespiratory distressMeconiumSepsisIntensive care medicineMeconium aspiration syndromeCardiologyFetusPediatricsAnesthesiaInternal medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Persistent fetal circulation (PFC), also known as persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn, is defined as postnatal persistence of right-to-left ductal or atrial shunting, or both in the presence of elevated right ventricular pressure. It is a relatively rare condition that is usually seen in newborns with respiratory distress syndrome, overwhelming sepsis, meconium and other aspiration syndromes, intrauterine hypoxia and ischemia, and/or neonatal hypoxia and ischemia. This condition causes severe hypoxemia, and, as a result, has significant morbidity and mortality. Improved antenatal and neonatal care; the use of surfactant; continuous monitoring of oxygenation, blood pressure and other vital functions; and early recognition and intervention have made this condition even more rare. In modern neonatal intensive care units, anticipation and early treatment of PFC and its complications in sick newborns are commonplace. Thus, severe forms of PFC are only seen on isolated occasions. Consequently, it is even more imperative to revisit PFC compared with the time when there were occasional cases of PFC seen in neonatal intensive care units, and to discuss evolving treatment and management issues that pertain to this syndrome.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.309 · 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.

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

Citations24
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207