MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1829490282 · doi:10.1002/ppul.23220

Changes in multiple breath washout measures after raised volume rapid thoracoabdominal compression maneuvers in infants

2015· article· en· W1829490282 on OpenAlexaff
Padmaja Subbarao, Zihang Lu, Krzysztof Kowalik, Meghan Brown, Susan Balkovec, Per Gustafsson, Wendy Lou, Félix Ratjen

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Pulmonology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWashoutNitrogen washoutCompression (physics)Volume (thermodynamics)AnesthesiaInternal medicineLung volumesFunctional residual capacityLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple breath inert gas washout (MBW) measurements in infants are performed supine and often obtained under sedation and thus are combined with other lung function tests such as raised volume rapid thoracoabdominal compression (RVRTC). In this study, we sought to determine the effects of RVRTC maneuvers on MBW measures. Compared with tests performed prior to RVRTC, MBW measured after RVRTC was associated with a small reduction in functional residual capacity and a more pronounced decrease in cumulative expired volume in both healthy children and children with obstructive lung disease (cystic fibrosis or recurrent wheeze) indicating a more efficient washout after the raised volume maneuvers. Lung Clearance Index (LCI) decreased significantly in infants with respiratory disease (change in LCI of -0.24 units post RVRTC; standard error (SE) ± 0.07 units; P = 0.0004), but not in healthy infants (change in LCI of -0.08 units; SE ± 0.11 units; P = 0.44). As the RVRTC maneuver affects MBW measurements in infants, the timing of testing procedures needs to be standardized in longitudinal studies.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric PulmonologySame topicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia StudiesFrench-language works237,207