Use of high noninvasive respiratory support pressures in preterm neonates: a single-center experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe the incidence, indications and clinical outcomes following high pressures on noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) in preterm neonates. STUDY DESIGN: O for at least 12 continuous hours using nasal continuous positive airway pressure (NCPAP) and/or nasal high-frequency ventilation (NIHFV). Clinical and physiological outcomes following high NRS were ascertained. Median (IQR) and percentages were used to describe continuous and categorical data, respectively. RESULTS: There were 131 instances of high NRS use in 70 of 315 eligible infants. Most common indication was post-extubation, observed in 37% (49/131) of high NRS instances. Intubation was avoided in 71% (93/131) of instances in the first 7 days following high NRS initiation. There were no physiological perturbations in heart rate, blood pressure or oxygen requirement. Furthermore, there were no instances of lung hyperinflation, pneumothoraces or spontaneous intestinal perforation following high NRS. CONCLUSION: The use of high NRS pressure was followed by avoidance of intubation in the majority of cases without adverse effects. Further research on high NRS use including its indications, clinical outcomes and safety profile is warranted.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".