Morphological Changes in the Lungs of Meconium-Stained Piglets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Meconium staining of the skin is a common event associated with fetal hypoxia, stillbirths, weak-born piglets, and neonatal mortality. Aspiration of meconium leads to meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS). This study was undertaken to assess the relationship between the degree of meconium staining of the skin at birth, meconium aspiration, and pulmonary changes in porcine neonates. A total of 353 farrowing sows and 3,693 born piglets were monitored during parturition and for 15 days after delivery. Umbilical cords were classified as normal or ruptured. Meconium staining in the skin was graded as nonstained, mildly, moderately, and severely stained. Mortality from birth to 15 days of age was 8.4%. The lungs from 60 meconium-stained piglets and 60 lungs from nonstained piglets were collected and microscopically examined for meconium aspiration and inflammation. Rupture of the umbilical cord was significantly higher (P < 0.01) in meconium-stained piglets. Microscopically, 32% and 40% of the lungs had evidence of meconium for the stained and nonstained groups, respectively. The microscopic grade of meconium aspiration and inflammatory cells was not different between nonstained and meconium-stained piglets. Aspiration of meconium induced a granulomatous response in the lungs. It was concluded that the grade of meconium staining is a good indicator of fetal hypoxia, but not a good predictor for meconium aspiration and MAS in piglets.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".