LUNG MECHANICS IN PRETERM RABBITS AFTER ANTENATAL ADMINISTRATION OF STEROIDS: A TIME-DEPENDENT RESPONSE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Assess pulmonary mechanics in a preterm rabbit model at different time points after antenatal steroids. Methods Betamethasone 0.05 mg/kg (BM) or normal saline (placebo) was administered to pregnant does on days 25 and 26 of gestation (term 31 days). Does without intervention were normal controls. Fetuses were harvested on days 27 (7 BM, 6 placebo, 7 normal), 28 (14 BM, 12 placebo, 15 normal) or 29 (10 BM, 9 placebo, 9 normal). Ventilation was performed with a Flexivent (Scireq, Montreal); pulmonary mechanics and lung impedance by forced oscillation technique were assessed at 4-minute intervals for 30 minutes. Results BM caused significant growth retardation at all ages. At 27 days, lung mechanics were not different between the three groups. At 28 days, BM pups had significantly better lung mechanics compared with normal rabbits. Placebo pups showed an equal improvement in lung mechanics. Lung impedance measurements, tissue elastance (H) and tissue damping (G) were better in the placebo group. At 29 days, normal pups had better values than BM or placebo pups. Conclusion In this model, antenatal administration of steroids had a time-dependent effect on pulmonary mechanics. At 28 days, BM had a positive effect on all parameters; however, an important placebo effect was shown probably secondary to a maternofetal stress response. At 29 days, steroids had a negative effect compared with placebo and normal rabbits. This might be explained by a temporary increase in lung maturation and surfactant release followed by an arrest in lung growth and development.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".