Sustained inflations and avoiding mechanical ventilation to prevent death or bronchopulmonary dysplasia: a meta-analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sustained inflations and avoidance of endotracheal mechanical ventilation (eMV) are delivery room interventions aimed at preventing bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD). Their effectiveness is the subject of the present meta-analysis.The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of preterm infants that compared: 1) sustained inflations with intermittent positive-pressure ventilation; and 2) a non-intubated strategy of respiratory support with one that prescribed eMV at an earlier stage. Data extraction and analysis followed the standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration. The primary outcome was death or BPD, defined as need for oxygen or positive pressure treatment at 36 weeks' postmenstrual age.Avoiding eMV (nine RCTs, 3486 infants) reduced the risk of death or BPD, with a risk ratio of 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.97) and a number needed to treat of 35. After sustained inflations (six RCTs, 854 infants), the risk ratio was 0.85 (95% CI 0.65-1.12). A current multicentre RCT of sustained inflations in very preterm infants was halted for increased early mortality in the sustained inflations arm.While strategies aimed at avoiding eMV had a small but significant impact on preventing BPD, sustained inflations had no effect and may even increase mortality in very preterm infants.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it