MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation With Chest Compressions During Sustained Inflations

2013· article· en· W2131498460 on OpenAlexafffund
Georg M. Schmölzer, Megan O’Reilly, Joseph LaBossière, Tze-Fun Lee, Shaun Cowan, Sharon Qin, David L. Bigam, Po‐Yin Cheung

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alexandra HospitalUniversity of Alberta HospitalUniversity of Alberta
FundersLaerdal Foundation for Acute MedicineUniversity of AlbertaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaResuscitationAsphyxiaCardiopulmonary resuscitationReturn of spontaneous circulationNeonatal resuscitationHeart rateEpinephrineBlood pressureInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Guidelines on neonatal resuscitation recommend 90 chest compressions (CCs) and 30 manual inflations (3:1) per minute in newborns. The study aimed to determine whether CC s during sustained inflations (SIs) improves the recovery of asphyxiated newborn piglets in comparison with coordinated 3:1 resuscitation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Term newborn piglets (n=8/group) were anesthetized, intubated, instrumented, and exposed to 45-minute normocapnic hypoxia followed by asphyxia. Piglets were randomly assigned to receive either 3:1 resuscitation (3:1 group) or CCs during SIs (SI group) when the heart rate decreased to 25% of baseline. Piglets randomly assigned to the SI group received SIs with a pressure of 30 cm H2O for 30 s. During the SI, CCs at a rate of 120/min were provided. SI was interrupted after 30 s for 1 s before a further 30-s SI was provided. CCs were continued throughout SIs. CCs and SI were continued until the return of spontaneous circulation. Continuous respiratory parameters, cardiac output, mean systemic and pulmonary artery pressures, and regional blood flows were measured. Mean (standard deviation) time for return of spontaneous circulation was significantly reduced in SI group versus 3:1 group (32 [11] s versus 205 [113] s, respectively). In the SI group, administration of oxygen and epinephrine was significantly lower, whereas minute ventilation and exhaled CO2 were significantly increased. The SI group had significantly higher mean systemic and pulmonary arterial pressures during resuscitation in comparison with the 3:1 group (51 [10] versus 31 [5] mm Hg; 41[7] versus 31 [7] mm Hg, respectively; all P<0.05), with improved cardiac output and carotid blood flow. CONCLUSIONS: Combining CCs and SIs significantly improved the return of spontaneous circulation with better hemodynamic recovery in asphyxiated newborn piglets in comparison with standard coordinated 3:1 resuscitation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations113
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207