Impact of Target Blood Gases on Outcome in Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia (CDH)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) stabilization strategies which normalize physiology according to predetermined blood gas targets may contribute to observed improved survival rates of patients with CDH. The purpose of our study was to compare risk-adjusted outcomes of CDH patients managed with or without blood gas targets established at NICU admission. METHODS: Cases were collected from a national CDH network between May 2005 and November 2007. On NICU admission, the responsible neonatologist was asked to establish target ranges for pH, pCO (2), pO (2), and pre/post-ductal O (2) saturation. The outcomes analyzed were mortality, need for ECMO, days of mechanical ventilation/supplemental oxygen, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 147 CDH infants, 63 had admission blood gas targets. Severity of illness and gestational age in both groups were comparable (SNAP-II score). Infants with blood gas targets had a significantly lower mortality than those without (Hazard ratio 0.27, p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Blood gas targets for the management of infants with CDH are associated with improved survival. Although the willingness to create and use stabilization targets to guide early NICU care may be a surrogate for other factors (experience, staffing, lack of interest), it is clearly associated with improved survival in CDH.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".