Higher or lower oxygen for delivery room resuscitation of preterm infants below 28 completed weeks gestation: a meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To systematically review outcomes of infants ≤28+6 weeks gestation randomised to resuscitation with low (≤0.3) vs high (≥0.6) fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO 2 ) at delivery. Design Systematic review of randomised controlled trials of low (≤0.3) vs high (≥0.6) FiO 2 resuscitation. Information was obtained from databases (Medline/Pub Med, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane) and meeting abstracts between 1990 to 2015. Search index terms: preterm/ resuscitation/oxygen. Data for infants ≤28+6 weeks gestation were independently extracted and pooled using a random effects model. Analyses were performed with Revman V.5. Main outcome measures Death in hospital, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), retinopathy of prematurity >grade 2 (ROP), intraventricular haemorrhage >grade 2 (IVH), patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) and necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). Results A total of 251 and 253 infants were enrolled in 8 studies (6 masked, 2 unmasked) in the lower and higher oxygen groups, respectively, (mean gestation 26 weeks) between 2005 and 2014. There were no differences in BPD (relative risk, 95% CIs 0.88 (0.68 to 1.14)), IVH (0.81 (0.52 to 1.27)), ROP (0.82 (0.46 to 1.46)), PDA (0.95 (0.80 to 1.14)) and NEC (1.61 (0.67 to 3.36)) and overall mortality (0.99 (0.52 to 1.91)). Mortality was lower in low oxygen arms of masked studies (0.46 (0.23 to 0.92), p=0.03) and higher in low oxygen arms of unmasked studies (1.94 (1.02 to 3.68), p=0.04). Conclusions There is no difference in the overall risk of death or other common preterm morbidities after resuscitation is initiated at delivery with lower (≤0.30) or higher (≥0.6) FiO 2 in infants ≤28+6 weeks gestation. The opposing results for masked and unmasked trials may represent a Type I error, emphasising the need for larger, well designed studies.
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 | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.023 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".