Post‐discharge respiratory outcomes of children with acute respiratory distress syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: While long-term sequelae of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) are well-documented in adults, few studies reported post-discharge respiratory complications in pediatric ARDS (PARDS) and none used the recent Pediatric Acute Lung Injury Consensus Conference (PALICC) diagnostic criteria. This study describes the respiratory symptoms, pulmonary function, and health resource use of PARDS survivors at 3 months post-discharge. DESIGN: Retrospective study. PATIENT SELECTION: Children less than 18 years admitted to the intensive care unit of Sainte-Justine University Health Center from 1st September 2015 to 1st July 2017, and meeting PALICC diagnostic criteria for PARDS. METHODS: We evaluated 38 of the 44 children with PARDS in the follow-up clinic at a mean (SD) of 3.4 (2.0) months post-discharge for respiratory symptoms, age-appropriate pulmonary function tests (spirometry or oscillometry, maximal respiratory pressures), and all-cause emergency department (ED) visits or rehospitalizations since discharge. RESULTS: Fourteen (36.8%) had abnormal respiratory symptoms (most commonly cough between respiratory infections and wheezing), 7 of whom (18.4%) presented new respiratory symptoms since PARDS diagnosis. A mild-to-moderate restrictive pattern was observed in 3 of 10 patients who performed spirometry and mildly decreased maximal inspiratory pressures were noted in 2 of 8 patients who performed these maneuvers. Nine (23.7%) patients consulted in the ED and 4 (10.5%) were rehospitalized post-discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Despite our cohort's limited sample size, our findings suggest that a significant proportion of PARDS survivors experience abnormal respiratory symptoms, pulmonary function deficits, and recurrent problems requiring medical attention. Larger, multicenter studies are required to identify risk factors associated with poor post-discharge outcomes among PARDS survivors.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".