Elective surfactant increased median duration of mechanical ventilation in preterm infants with mild to moderate respiratory distress syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Escobedo MB, Gunkel JH, Kennedy KA, et al . Early surfactant for neonates with mild to moderate respiratory distress syndrome: a multicenter, randomized trial. J Pediatr 2004;144:804–8.[OpenUrl][1][PubMed][2][Web of Science][3] Q What is the efficacy of elective brief intubation for early single dose surfactant administration compared with administration as clinically indicated for preterm infants with mild to moderate respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) not requiring mechanical ventilation? ### ![Graphic][4] Design: randomised controlled trial. ### ![Graphic][5] Allocation: concealed. ### ![Graphic][6] Blinding: unclear if blinded. ### ![Graphic][7] Follow up period: up to discharge from hospital. ### ![Graphic][8] Setting: 5 centres in Texas, USA. ### ![Graphic][9] Patients: 136 infants with birth weights ⩾1250 g, gestational age ⩽36 completed weeks, postnatal age 4–24 hours, FIO2⩾0.40 with or without nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), RDS (based on chest radiograph and clinical presentation), no requirement for mechanical ventilation, no previous treatment with surfactant, no known cardiac or respiratory related congenital anomalies, and no anomalies … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DThe%2BJournal%2Bof%2Bpediatrics%26rft.stitle%253DJ%2BPediatr%26rft.aulast%253DEscobedo%26rft.auinit1%253DM.%2BB.%26rft.volume%253D144%26rft.issue%253D6%26rft.spage%253D804%26rft.epage%253D808%26rft.atitle%253DEarly%2Bsurfactant%2Bfor%2Bneonates%2Bwith%2Bmild%2Bto%2Bmoderate%2Brespiratory%2Bdistress%2Bsyndrome%253A%2Ba%2Bmulticenter%252C%2Brandomized%2Btrial.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F15192630%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=15192630&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F8%2F1%2F9.atom [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000222047900022&link_type=ISI [4]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-5.gif [9]: /embed/inline-graphic-6.gif
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".