Morphine for elective endotracheal intubation in neonates: a randomized trial [ISRCTN43546373]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Elective endotracheal intubations are still commonly performed without premedication in many institutions. The hypothesis tested in this study was that morphine given prior to elective intubations in neonates would decrease fluctuations in vital signs, shorten the duration of intubation and reduce the number of attempts. METHODS: From December 1999 to September 2000, infants of all gestations admitted to a level III neonatal intensive care unit and requiring an elective endotracheal intubation were randomly assigned to receive morphine 0.2 mg/kg IV or placebo 5 minutes before intubation. Duration of severe hypoxemia (HR< 90/min and Sp02<85%), duration of procedure, duration of hypoxemia (Sp02<85%), number of attempts and change in mean blood pressure were compared between groups. RESULTS: 34 infants (median 989 g and 28 weeks gestation) were included. The duration of severe hypoxemia was similar between groups. Duration of procedure, duration of hypoxemia, number of attempts and increases in mean blood pressure were also similar between groups. 94% of infants experienced bradycardia during the procedure. CONCLUSION: We failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of morphine in reducing the physiological instability or time needed to perform elective intubations. Alternatives, perhaps with more rapid onset of action, should be considered.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".