Glycerin suppositories used prophylactically in premature infants (SUPP) trial: a study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Feeding is a significant challenge for premature infants in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). These patients are often treated with glycerin suppositories to stimulate the passage of meconium and prevent feeding intolerance. Unfortunately, the evidence for this practice is inconclusive. METHODS/DESIGN: This protocol is for an external pilot study that will assess the feasibility of a superiority, placebo-controlled, parallel-design, multicenter randomized controlled trial. Participants are premature infants treated in a level 3 NICU with a gestational age 24 to 32 weeks and/or birth weight of 500 to 1500 g. Thirty participants will be recruited as part of this external pilot study. Participants will be randomized to glycerin suppository (250 mg) or placebo starting 48 to 72 h after birth and continuing once daily until meconium evacuation is complete or for a maximum of 12 days. The placebo consists of a 250-mg glycerin suppository placed in the diaper rather than the rectum. Study treatments are administered by the charge nurse on duty who is not otherwise involved in patient care. All other clinicians and research personnel will remain blinded. Outcomes for the pilot study are percentage of eligible participants randomized, percentage of infants reaching full enteral feeds, cost, and treatment-related adverse events (rectal bleeding, rectal perforation, and anal fissure). DISCUSSION: This external pilot study will assess the feasibility of a multicenter randomized controlled trial of glycerin suppositories in premature infants. The subsequent multicenter trial will have sufficient power to determine whether this treatment strategy is associated with decreased time to full enteral feeds. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02153606.
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 | 0.047 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.011 |
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".