Short Apneas and Their Relationship to Body Movements and Sighs in Preterm Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To test the hypothesis that there is an association among short apneas (3-10 s), body movements, and sighs, we studied 11 preterm infants (body weight 1,500 +/- 200 g, mean +/- SE; gestational age 30 +/- 1 weeks, postnatal age 28 +/- 5 days) using a flow-through system. A total of 1,166 apneas, 1,024 movements, and 473 sighs were recorded. Of the 1,166 apneas, 460 (39%) were associated with movements, 91 (8%) with sighs, and 226 (19%) with both movements and sighs. The rate of apneas associated with movements and sighs was significantly greater than expected if only a random association had occurred. These differences remained in quiet, rapid eye movement, and indeterminate sleep. The frequency of each of the three events was similar in a given sleep state. Of the 460 movements associated with apnea, 26% preceded, 23% followed, and 51% occurred during apnea. Similarly, of the 315 sighs associated with apnea, 44% preceded and 56% followed apnea. Apneas preceded by movements were longer than those without movements (5.6 +/- 0.2 vs. 4.9 +/- 0.1 s; p = 0.01). Oxygen saturation before apnea with movement (94 +/- 0.1%) was lower than before apnea alone (96 +/- 0.6%; p = 0.02) and also lower than before movement alone (96 +/- 0.1%; p = 0.001). These findings suggest: (1) there is a strong association among short apneas, movements, and sighs in these infants; (2) sighs appear not to be an isolated event and are likely to be part of a more general motor discharge, and (3) these events are accompanied by mild desaturations and bradycardias.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".