Combined Positive and Negative Pressure Ventilation in the Management of Severe Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Newborn Infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eleven newborn infants with severe respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) were artificially ventilated with an intermittent positive pressure respirator while a continuous negative pressure of ––4 to ––8 cm H2O was maintained about the chest; thereby achieving the equivalent positive of pressure ventilation. Although only two infants ultimately survived, arterial oxygen tension was improved in all patients, with a mean rise of 69.8 ± 17.3 mm Hg. Simultaneously, the alveolar-arterial oxygen difference fell·by a mean of 63.7 ± 18.4 mm Hg, even though the infants had not improved on preceding trials of both intermittent negative and intermittent positive pressure ventilation alone. These changes are significant at a level of p < 0.01. The maintenance of a continuous transpulmonary pressure gradient is an effective method for improving arterial oxygenation in infants requiring mechanical ventilation for the respiratory failure of RDS.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".