Therapies for Refractory Hypoxemia in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a common and severe form of acute lung injury, resulting from both direct (eg, pneumonia) and indirect (eg, sepsis) pulmonary insults. It is a common cause of admission to the intensive care unit due to hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation, and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In some patients, ARDS leads to the development of life-threatening refractory hypoxemia. In these patients, physicians may consider a number of therapies (eg, recruitment maneuvers, prone positioning, inhaled nitric oxide, high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation) to alleviate hypoxemia in patients unable to maintain reasonable oxygenation while being supported with conventional mechanical ventilation. Although these strategies have demonstrated improved oxygenation with their use, their impact on patient-important outcomes (eg, mortality) remains unproven. However, in the minority of patients with ARDS and refractory hypoxemia, institution of these therapies may be considered on a case-by-case basis. Future studies are needed to elucidate the efficacy of these therapies on outcomes in patients with severe ARDS and refractory hypoxemia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".