Acute effects of nitric oxide inhalation in ARDS: A dose finding study at steady state kinetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Inhaled Nitric oxide (INO) decreases pulmonary artery pressures and improves oxygenation in patients with ARDS. Aim: To evaluate the dose response to 1-20 parts per million (ppm) INO in ARDS, by noting changes in oxygenation, pulmonary artery systolic pressures (PASP) and to determine optimum dose. Methodology and Design: Prospective study. Setting: 10 bed general intensive care unit. Patients: 13 consecutive patients with ARDS. Interventions: INO was given between 1-20 ppm with 15 minutes at each concentration via an insufflator from a high pressure source, to the inspiratory limb of the ventilator. Study had ascending and descending phase. Results and Conclusions: The optimum dose of INO to improve oxygenation was between 3 and 10 ppm. PaO 2 improvement was independent of pulmonary haemodynamic changes. The pulmonary haemodynamic changes needed higher INO initially. Once stabilized, INO could be brought down to concentrations at which maximum improvement in PaO occurred. 2 The 'responders' had lesser duration of pre INO ventilation and lower PaO 2 /FiO 2 . Key words: ARDS, nitric oxide, acute effects Adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is oxide [INO] therapy has not been shown to improve the characterized by acute respiratory distress, refractory outcome and the optimum dose of INO in ARDS is not hypoxaemia and pulmonary hypertension and remains defined. a challenging organ failure for the intensivist. Accumulating data from basic science and clinical studies
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".