A review of international clinical practice guidelines for the use of oxygen in the delivery room resuscitation of preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim To collate and assess international clinical practice guidelines (CPG) to determine current recommendations guiding oxygen management for respiratory stabilisation of preterm infants at delivery. Methods A search of public databases using the terms ‘clinical practice guidelines’, ‘preterm’, ‘oxygen’ and ‘resuscitation’ was made and complemented by direct query to consensus groups, resuscitation expert committees and clinicians. Data were extracted to include the three criteria for assessment: country of origin, gestation and initial FiO2 and target SpO2 for the first 10 minutes of life. Results A total of 45 CPGs were identified: 36 provided gestation specific recommendations (<28 to <37 weeks) while eight distinguished only between ‘preterm’ and ‘term’. The most frequently recommended initial FiO2 were between 0.21 and 0.3 (n = 17). Most countries suggested altering FiO2 to meet SpO2 targets recommended by expert committees, However, specific five‐minute SpO2 targets differed by up to 20% (70–90%) between guidelines. Five countries did not specify SpO2 targets. Conclusion CPG recommendations for delivery room oxygen management of preterm infants vary greatly, particularly in regard to gestational ages, initial FiO2 and SpO2 targets and most acknowledge the lack of evidence behind these recommendations. Sufficiently large and well‐designed randomised studies are needed to inform on this important practice.
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 | 0.015 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.018 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".