Compliance Rates in Children Using Noninvasive Continuous Positive Airway Pressure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: For a subpopulation of children with obstructive sleep apnea, the mainstay of treatment is nasal continuous positive airway pressure (nCPAP). Accurate measures of "time in use" have not been used to assess compliance with nCPAP in large numbers of children. Data from a comprehensive nCPAP program are used to describe nCPAP use among children aged 6 months to 18 years and provide time-in-use compliance rates. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study SETTING: University Pediatric Teaching Hospital INTERVENTIONS: Initiation of nCPAP treatment MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Seventy-nine children were identified as requiring treatment with nCPAP, with 65 (82%) successfully established on nCPAP during the 46-month study period. Objective compliance data were available on 50 children: 66% were boys, 78% had a complicating medical disorder, the mean age was 10 +/- 5.1 years, and the median apnea-hypopnea index was 11.3 (interquartile range, 5.4-25.9). Follow-up ranged from 8 to 979 days. Forty-eight percent of children used nCPAP immediately. Seventy-six percent of children used nCPAP for at least half the days, with use defined as 1 or more hours of recording during a 24-hour period. Mean daily use was 4.7 hours (interquartile range, 1.4-7.0), and mean daily use on days nCPAP was used was 6.3 hours (interquartile range, 3.3-8.5) CONCLUSIONS: With patience, a behavioral modification approach, and parental commitment, children will be accepting of nCPAP and reasonably compliant with treatment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".