Hypotension in Preterm Infants (HIP) randomised trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether restricting the use of inotrope after diagnosis of low blood pressure (BP) in the first 72 hours of life affects survival without significant brain injury at 36 weeks of postmenstrual age (PMA) in infants born before 28 weeks of gestation. DESIGN: Double-blind, placebo-controlled randomised trial. Caregivers were masked to group assignment. SETTING: 10 sites across Europe and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Infants born before 28 weeks of gestation were eligible if they had an invasive mean BP less than their gestational age that persisted for ≥15 min in the first 72 hours of life and a cerebral ultrasound free of significant (≥ grade 3) intraventricular haemorrhage. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomly assigned to saline bolus followed by either a dopamine infusion (standard management) or placebo (5% dextrose) infusion (restrictive management). PRIMARY OUTCOME: Survival to 36 weeks of PMA without severe brain injury. RESULTS: The trial terminated early due to significant enrolment issues (7.7% of planned recruitment). 58 infants were enrolled between February 2015 and September 2017. The two groups were well matched for baseline variables. In the standard group, 18/29 (62%) achieved the primary outcome compared with 20/29 (69%) in the restrictive group (p=0.58). Additional treatments for low BP were used less frequently in the standard arm (11/29 (38%) vs 19/29 (66%), p=0.038). CONCLUSION: Though this study lacked power, we did not detect major differences in clinical outcomes between standard or restrictive approach to treatment. These results will inform future studies in this area. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01482559, EudraCT 2010-023988-17.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 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".