Effect of indomethacin on closure of ductus arteriosus in very‐low‐birthweight neonates <sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To identify factors related to indomethacin non-responsiveness for patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) closure in very-low-birthweight (VLBW) neonates. METHODS: A chart review of 107 VLBW neonates with a clinical diagnosis of PDA who received indomethacin, admitted to a tertiary neonatal intensive care unit in Toronto, Canada, was conducted (study period November 2001 to October 2003). Positive responders were those with no clinical evidence of PDA for 72 h after indomethacin. RESULTS: Response to the first course of indomethacin was 75%, and to the second course 67% among initial responders. Higher CRIB score (OR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02-1.31) and early surfactant administration (OR 3.74, 95% CI 1.04-13.47) were associated with non-responsiveness to indomethacin. CONCLUSION: Indomethacin is effective for PDA closure. The response rate diminished with subsequent courses. Early surfactant and severity of illness at admission were associated with non-responsiveness to indomethacin.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 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".