MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104994377 · doi:10.1177/1479972310375454

Review Series: What goes around, comes around: childhood influences on later lung health?: Long-term follow-up of infants with lung disease of prematurity

2010· article· en· W2104994377 on OpenAlexaff
Indra Narang

Bibliographic record

VenueChronic Respiratory Disease · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBronchopulmonary dysplasiaMedicineLungPediatricsDiseaseRespiratory systemLung diseaseIncidence (geometry)Intensive care medicineGestational agePregnancyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The incidence of live preterm birth is increasing and concomitantly the survival of preterm babies has increased over the last 30 years due to advances in neonatal care. Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) is a chronic respiratory disease that develops as a consequence of perinatal and/or neonatal lung injury following preterm birth and the pathology has also changed with changes in neonatal care. There are data suggesting that there is increased respiratory morbidity of ex-preterm subjects in childhood. It is only now that large populations of preterm subjects are reaching adulthood and may be at risk of persistent respiratory morbidity. This review will summarize the current knowledge in adulthood of respiratory sequelae following preterm birth; specifically it will review respiratory symptoms, pulmonary function, exercise capacity and structural lung disease as determined by high resolution computed tomography scans in ex-preterm survivors with and without BPD. Whether prematurity-related lung disease is associated with chronic obstructive airways disease will be discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChronic Respiratory DiseaseSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207