Pilot study of safety and tolerability of inhaled hypertonic saline in infants with cystic fibrosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inhaled hypertonic saline (HS) positively affects both lung function and pulmonary exacerbations in children and adults with cystic fibrosis (CF). Early initiation of treatment may potentially reduce lung function decline and improve outcome of CF patients. However, the safety and tolerability of HS have not been established in infants and young children. We conducted a prospective trial of inhaled HS in infants with CF. Raised volume rapid thoracoabdominal compression (RVRTC) maneuvers were performed at baseline, 10 min after salbutamol inhalation and 15 min after inhalation of a 7% HS solution. Oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, heart rate, and cough frequency were recorded during each inhalation. A clinically important change in lung function was defined a priori as a change in FEV 0.5 of > or =20%. Thirteen infants (5 female) aged 25-140 weeks were enrolled in the study. Overall, there was no difference between FEV(0.5) or FEF(25-75) at baseline, after bronchodilator or after HS. Respiratory and heart rate as well as oxygen saturation remained stable during inhalation of the HS. Three infants had cough during inhalation; one of the infants woke up due to cough but recovered within 5 min. No other side effects were observed during or immediately after inhalation. There was no difference in microbiologic yield between pre- and post-HS throat swabs. In this pilot study, inhalation of HS was well tolerated in CF infants. These results support a study of the efficacy of HS in this age group.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".