MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969575478 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028066

Delivery room interventions to prevent bronchopulmonary dysplasia in preterm infants: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2969575478 on OpenAlexafffund
Souvik Mitra, Timothy Disher, Gerhard Pichler, Brandon D’Souza, Helen McCord, Varsha Chayapathi, Karlee Jones, Georg M. Schmölzer

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alexandra HospitalUniversity of AlbertaIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
FundersUniversity of AlbertaChildren's Hospital FoundationStollery Children’s Hospital FoundationWomen and Children's Health Research InstituteChildren's Health Research InstituteHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineBronchopulmonary dysplasiaPsychological interventionSystematic reviewMeta-analysisIntensive care medicineRetinopathy of prematurityPediatricsMEDLINERandomized controlled trialBlindingGestational ageSurgeryPathologyPregnancyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: As gestational age decreases, incidence of bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) and chronic lung disease increases. There are many interventions used in the delivery room to prevent acute lung injury and consequently BPD in these patients. The availability of different treatment options often poses a practical challenge to the practicing neonatologist when it comes to making an evidence-based choice as the multitude of pairwise systematic reviews including Cochrane reviews that are currently available only provide a narrow perspective through head-to-head comparisons. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials evaluating delivery room interventions within the first golden hour after birth for prevention of BPD. The primary outcome includes BPD. Secondary outcomes include death at 36 weeks of postmenstrual age or before discharge; severe intraventricular haemorrhage (grade 3 or 4 based on the Papile criteria); any air leak syndromes (including pneumothorax or pulmonary interstitial emphysema); retinopathy of prematurity (any stage) and neurodevelopmental impairment at 18-24 months. We will search from their inception to August 2018, the following databases: Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials as well as grey literature resources. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, review full texts, extract information and assess the risk of bias and the confidence in the estimate (with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach). This review will use Bayesian network meta-analysis approach which allows the comparison of the multiple delivery room interventions for prevention of BPD. We will perform a Bayesian network meta-analysis to combine the pooled direct and indirect treatment effect estimates for each outcome, effectiveness and safety of delivery room interventions for prevention of BPD. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The proposed protocol is a network meta-analysis, which has been registered on PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42018078648). The results will provide an evidence-based guide to choosing the right sequence of early postnatal interventions that will be associated with the least likelihood of inducing lung injury and BPD in preterm infants. Furthermore, we will identify knowledge gaps and will encourage further research for other therapeutic options. Therefore, its results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. Due to the nature of the design, no ethics approval is necessary.

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)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.111
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: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0710.111
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.028
Bibliometrics0.0110.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.005

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 head0.447
GPT teacher head0.590
Teacher spread0.143 · 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
GenreProtocol

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207