Evaluating the impact of CPAP weaning procedures on total days on nasal CPAP: A retrospective chart review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on how to wean infants from Nasal Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (NCPAP). We hypothesized that ceasing NCPAP abruptly would decrease the duration required, compared with a gradual wean. METHODS: This retrospective chart review included preterm infants requiring NCPAP for over 48 hours. Cohort1 weaned NCPAP by cycling on and off, while cohort 2 ceased NCPAP abruptly. The primary outcome was total days on NCPAP. Secondary outcomes included rate of bronchopulmonary dysplasia, weight gain, duration of hospital stay, and compliance with the use of stability criteria. RESULTS: 81 infants met inclusion criteria in cohort one, and 89 in cohort two. Median days on NCPAP were 17.0 and 11.0 days, respectively, not significant. There was no significant difference in secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant association between the two NCPAP weaning protocols and the outcomes studied.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".