International Survey on the Management of Congenital Diaphragmatic Hernia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This study aims to define patterns in the management of congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH). METHODS: A total of 180 delegates (77% senior surgeons) from 44 (26 European) countries completed a survey at the 2014 European Pediatric Surgeons' Association meeting. RESULTS: Overall, 34% of the surgeons work in centers that treat < 5 cases of CDH/y, 38% work in centers that treat 5 to 10 cases/y, and 28% work in centers that treat > 10 cases/y. Overall, 62% of the surgeons work in extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) centers and 23% in fetal surgery centers. Prenatal work up and delivery: 47% surgeons request prenatal magnetic resonance imaging, 53% offer karyotyping, 22% perform a fetal intervention, 74% monitor head-to-lung ratio, and 55% administer maternal steroids. Delivery is via cesarean section for 47% surgeons, at 36 to 38 weeks for 71% surgeons, and in a tertiary care center for 94% of the surgeons. POSTNATAL MANAGEMENT: A total of 76% surgeons report elective intubation, 65% start antibiotics preoperatively, and 45% administer surfactant. In case of refractory hypoxia, 66% surgeons consider ECMO with a variable course. Parenteral feeding is started preoperatively by 56% of the surgeons. Only 13% of the surgeons request contrast studies preoperatively to rule out malrotation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".