MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762882549 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012297

Pulse oximetry sensor application for neonates during resuscitation

2016· article· en· W2762882549 on OpenAlexaff
Venkataseshan Sundaram, Deepak Louis, Shiv Sajan Saini, Praveen Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPulse oximetryMedicineResuscitationPulse (music)Gestational ageNeonatal resuscitationIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaEncephalopathyEmergency medicineInternal medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: Primary objective: To evaluate the effect of pulse oximetry sensor application on all‐cause mortality, hypoxic‐ischemic encephalopathy and other neonatal complications in neonates requiring monitoring in the delivery room. Secondary objectives: Secondary analyses will be undertaken to evaluate the effect of pulse oximetry sensor application in the following subgroups: 1. Gestational age (< 33 weeks and ≥ 33 weeks). 2. Need for positive pressure ventilation as part of resuscitation. 3. Generation of pulse oximeter. 4. Manufacturer of the pulse oximeter. 5. Need for supplemental oxygen during resuscitation/stabilization;

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.070
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.070
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.014
Bibliometrics0.0130.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.005

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207