Neugeborenen-Notfälle: Basale kardiopulmonale Reanimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The international guidelines for neonatal resuscitation were recently updated by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the American Heart Association (AHA) and the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR). The most important steps in resuscitation of the newly born infant are oxygenation and ventilation, including endotracheal intubation. These fundamental techniques will be emphasized and discussed in a problem-oriented approach. The clinical assessment of the newly born infant is based on a triad of respiration, heart rate and color. If indicated, resuscitation has to be initiated approximately 30 s after birth, i. e. prior to determination of the 1 min. Apgar score and umbilical artery pH. The key to successful neonatal resuscitation is establishment of adequate ventilation; it should commence - after oropharyngeal suctioning and ineffective tactile stimulation - when the heart rate drops < 100 bpm. Clinical evidence supporting the hypothesis that ventilation with room air versus 50 or 100 % oxygen is preferable in terms of neurological outcome is still preliminary and requires further investigation. Chest compressions should be administered if the heart rate remains < 60 bpm (or heart rate 60 to 80 bpm and not rising) despite adequate assisted ventilation. There should be a 3 : 1 ratio of compressions to ventilations to achieve approximately 120 events per minute. Moreover, the international guidelines recommend crystalloid volume expanders (normal saline or Ringer's lactate), red blood cells, sodium bicarbonate and naloxone for cardiopulmonary resuscitation of the newly born infant.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.013 |
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".