MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540163985 · doi:10.1159/000243166

Hemoglobin Oxygen Dissociation (P <sub>50</sub> ) in Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia

2009· article· en· W1540163985 on OpenAlexaff
Susanna Furfaro, Janie Prosmanne, Harry Bard

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of the Neonate · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBronchopulmonary dysplasiaMedicineOxygen–haemoglobin dissociation curveFetal hemoglobinGestational ageCord bloodPulse oximetryHemoglobinInternal medicineFetusAnesthesiaPregnancyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study was devised to determine the P50 in infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Other factors such as red blood cell 2,3-diphosphoglycerate (2,3-DPG) level proportions of adult (HbA) to fetal (HbF) hemoglobins which could affect P50 were also measured. Fourteen infants with clinical and radiological signs of BPD with a mean post-conceptional age of 42.2 +/- 4.7 weeks born at a mean gestational age of 29.3 +/- 2.0 weeks were evaluated. The percentage of HbF determined in 8 infants was 40.1 +/- 20.3% and the mean 2,3-DPG concentrations was 13.1 +/- 2.2 mumol/g Hb. The P50 was 25.1 +/- 2.7 mm Hg (range 18-29.5 mm Hg). When a HbO2 curve was established based on a large volume of blood consisting of adult blood and newborn cord blood mixed to attain a P50 of 25.1 mm Hg, the PaO2 at 90% O2 saturation was 52 mm Hg. Since there can be a wide range in HbO2 in infants with chronic BPD, pulse oximetry remains the most prudent method of monitoring oxygen therapy in BPD infants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of the NeonateSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207