MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338964883 · doi:10.2147/mder.s99601

Inhaled pulmonary vasodilators for persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn: safety issues relating to drug administration and delivery devices

2016· review· en· W2338964883 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Devices Evidence and Research · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsMedicineNebulizerPulmonary hypertensionVasodilationIntensive care medicineVascular resistanceAnesthesiaPersistent pulmonary hypertensionDrug deliveryCardiologyHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment for persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn (PPHN) aims to reduce pulmonary vascular resistance while maintaining systemic vascular resistance. Selective pulmonary vasodilation may be achieved by targeting pulmonary-specific pathways or by delivering vasodilators directly to the lungs. Abrupt withdrawal of a pulmonary vasodilator can cause rebound pulmonary hypertension. Therefore, use of consistent delivery systems that allow for careful monitoring of drug delivery is important. This manuscript reviews published studies of inhaled vasodilators used for treatment of PPHN and provides an overview of safety issues associated with drug delivery and delivery devices as they relate to the risk of rebound pulmonary hypertension. Off-label use of aerosolized prostacyclins and an aerosolized prostaglandin in neonates with PPHN has been reported; however, evidence from large randomized clinical trials is lacking. The amount of a given dose of aerosolized drug that is actually delivered to the lungs is often unknown, and the actual amount of drug deposited in the lungs can be affected by several factors, including patient size, nebulizer used, and placement of the nebulizer within the breathing circuit. Inhaled nitric oxide (iNO) is the only pulmonary vasodilator approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of PPHN. The iNO delivery device, INOmax DSIR®IR, is designed to constantly monitor NO, NO2, and O2 deliveries and is equipped with audible and visual alarms to alert providers of abrupt discontinuation and incorrect drug concentration. Other safety features of this device include two independent backup delivery systems, a backup drug cylinder, a battery that provides up to 6 hours of uninterrupted medication delivery, and 27 alarms that monitor delivery, dosage, and system functions. The ability of the drug delivery device to provide safe, consistent dosing is important to consider when selecting a pulmonary vasodilator.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.919

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.280 · 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