High frequency oscillatory ventilation was not more effective than conventional ventilation in preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Johnson AH, Peacock JL, Greenough A, et al, for the United Kingdom Oscillation Study Group. High-frequency oscillatory ventilation for the prevention of chronic lung disease of prematurity. N Engl J Med2002 ; 347 : 633 –42 [OpenUrl][1][CrossRef][2][PubMed][3][Web of Science][4] QUESTION: In preterm infants who are 23–28 weeks gestational age, does high frequency oscillatory ventilation (HFOV) reduce death and chronic lung disease when compared with conventional ventilation (CV)? Randomised (unclear allocation concealment), unblinded, controlled trial with 8–13 weeks of follow up for the primary outcome. 25 centres: 22 in the UK and 1 each in Australia, Ireland, and Singapore. 870 infants were randomised before or just after delivery. 804 surviving infants who required endotracheal intubation from birth and ongoing intensive care were included. Exclusion criteria were transfer to another hospital for intensive care shortly after birth or major congenital abnormality. 797 infants (92%) … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DNew%2BEngland%2BJournal%2Bof%2BMedicine%26rft.stitle%253DNEJM%26rft.aulast%253DJohnson%26rft.auinit1%253DA.%2BH.%26rft.volume%253D347%26rft.issue%253D9%26rft.spage%253D633%26rft.epage%253D642%26rft.atitle%253DHigh-Frequency%2BOscillatory%2BVentilation%2Bfor%2Bthe%2BPrevention%2Bof%2BChronic%2BLung%2BDisease%2Bof%2BPrematurity%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Adoi%252F10.1056%252FNEJMoa020432%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F12200550%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJMoa020432&link_type=DOI [3]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=12200550&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febnurs%2F6%2F2%2F41.atom [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000177675500002&link_type=ISI
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".