MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586498040 · doi:10.1093/pch/17.suppl_a.34aa

Inotrope use Among Extremely Preterm Infants in Canadian Nicus : Variations and Outcomes

2012· article· en· W2586498040 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jia Min Wong, PS Shah, W Yoon, W Yee, Seung‐Koo Lee, K Dow

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInfant Health and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInotropeMedicineIntensive careIntensive care medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

groups compared to the RA group.Respiratory outcomes are shown in Table .CONCluSIONS: Supplemental oxygen use was not associated with faster resolution of SP.Babies in room air did not require supplemental oxygen and did not have longer recovery times.Perinatal Characteristics and Respiratory Outcomes *All groups are significantly different from each other RA MO (p<0.001),RA vs HO (p<0.001),MO vs HO (p<0.0001).**RA is significantly different than HO (P<0.001) and MO (p<0.001), but HO and MO are not significantly different (p=0.19)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicInfant Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207