The use of the Air Leak Test and Corticosteroids in Intubated children: A Survey of Pediatric Critical Care Fellowship Directors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Uncertainties exist regarding the value of the air leak test or use of steroids for preventing post-extubation stridor and extubation failure in children. OBJECTIVE: Determine the practice preferences of pediatric critical care physicians regarding the air leak test and administration of glucocorticosteroids to prevent airway edema. METHODS: A 14-question survey regarding the value of the air leak test, use of glucocorticosteroids, and management of airway edema in intubated children was sent to all North American pediatric critical care fellowship directors affiliated with medical school teaching hospitals. RESULTS: The response rate was 85% (58/68). Seventy-six percent (44/58) routinely check for air leak prior to extubation. The physicians who check for air leak were more likely to delay extubation in order to administer glucocorticosteroids (60% [26/43] vs 15% [2/13], p = 0.01). An air leak of >or= 30 cm H(2)O was more likely (than >or= 20 cm H(2)O) to result in delaying extubation (95% [35/37] vs 51% [19/37], p <0.001). Of the respondents who use steroids for airway edema prophylaxis, 73% (24/33) give steroids based on the air leak test. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of surveyed pediatric critical care fellowship program directors rely on the air leak test and use corticosteroids to prevent post-extubation stridor and extubation failure. At an air leak of >or= 30 cm H(2)O most of the surveyed physicians would delay extubation and initiate glucocorticosteroids.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".