Target oxygen saturation and development of pulmonary hypertension and increased pulmonary vascular resistance in preterm infants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Determine whether higher targeted oxygen levels are associated with reduced incidence of pulmonary hypertension (PH) and elevated pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) in extremely premature infants. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of 252 extremely preterm infants (<29 weeks), who underwent echocardiogram prior to discharge. PH rates were compared during periods (June 2012-May 2015 and June 2015-April 2016) when lower (88-92%) or higher (90-95%) oxygen saturation targets were used. PH was determined on echocardiography. The ratio of pulmonary artery acceleration time to right ventricular ejection time was computed, with values <0.31 indicative of elevated PVR. Survival analysis compared the effects of oxygen saturation group on development/resolution of PH and elevated PVR. RESULTS: The higher saturation group had significantly lower risk of developing PH (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.50, 95%CI 0.26-0.95; P = 0.03) or elevated PVR (HR = 0.55, 95%CI 0.38-0.81; P = 0.002), compared to the lower oxygen saturation group. Median time to PH development was significantly shorter in the lower saturation group than in the higher saturation group (5 days vs 12 days; P = 0.02), as was time to development of elevated PVR (4 days vs 6 days; P < 0.001). Duration of PH (P = 0.12) and elevated PVR (P = 0.86) did not differ significantly between groups. Cumulative incidence of PH (P = 0.04) and elevated PVR (P = 0.01) at 36 weeks post-menstrual age was significantly lower in the high saturation group compared to the lower saturation group. CONCLUSION: Higher targeted oxygen saturation was associated with reduced risk of PH or elevated PVR in extremely preterm infants compared to lower oxygen saturation target.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".