MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994409578 · doi:10.1159/000243342

Clinical and Physiological Responses to Prolonged Nasogastric Administration of Doxapram for Apnea of Prematurity

2009· article· en· W1994409578 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of the Neonate · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaHealth Sciences CentreManitoba Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDoxapramMedicineAnesthesiaApneaApnea of prematurityTheophyllineVentilation (architecture)Necrotizing enterocolitisInternal medicineGestational ageBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We hypothesized that enteral doxapram would effectively treat apnea of prematurity without the appearance of major side effects. Of 16 infants, 10 (BW 1,520 +/- 102 g) received doxapram alone and 6 (BW 1,020 +/- 35 g) received doxapram plus theophylline. Apneas decreased from 16.7 +/- 1.9 to 2.1 +/- 0.6 in infants receiving doxapram alone, and from 38.2 +/- 4.4 to 7.9 +/- 2.2 apneas/24 h in those receiving doxapram plus theophylline. This was associated with an increase in alveolar ventilation, a shift of the ventilatory response to CO2 to the left, and no change in the immediate ventilatory response to 100% oxygen. Side effects included premature teeth buds corresponding to the lower central incisors, prevalence of occult blood in stool and necrotizing enterocolitis. The findings suggest that doxapram effectively controls apnea when given enterally, but should be used cautiously because of potentially harmful side effects.

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.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.334 · 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