Heart rate changes during positive pressure ventilation after asphyxia-induced bradycardia in a porcine model of neonatal resuscitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Neonatal Resuscitation Program (NRP) states that if adequate positive pressure ventilation (PPV) was given for a low heart rate (HR), the infant's HR should increase within the first 15 s of PPV. OBJECTIVE: To assess changes in HR in piglets with asphyxia-induced bradycardia. METHODS: 25% of baseline). This was followed by 30 s adequate PPV and chest compression thereafter. Changes in HR during the 30 s of PPV were assessed and divided into four epochs (0-10 s, 5-15 s, 10-20 s and 20-30 s, respectively). RESULTS: Increase in HR >100/min was observed in 6/30 (20%) after 30 s of PPV. Within the epochs 0-10 s, 5-15 s or 10-20 s no piglet had an increase in HR >100/min. Additional 10/30 (33%) had a >10% increase in HR. CONCLUSION: In contrast to NRP recommendation, adequate PPV does not increase HR within 15 s after ventilation in piglets with asphyxia-induced bradycardia.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".