MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Late (≥ 7 days) inhalation corticosteroids to reduce bronchopulmonary dysplasia in preterm infants

2012· review· en· W4247347483 on OpenAlexaff
Wes Onland, Martin Offringa, Anton van Kaam

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBronchopulmonary dysplasiaMedicineInhalationPediatricsIncidence (geometry)Randomized controlled trialPlaceboRelative riskClinical trialAdverse effectAnesthesiaInternal medicineGestational agePregnancyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), defined as oxygen dependence at 36 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA), remains an important complication of prematurity. Pulmonary inflammation plays a central role in the pathogenesis of BPD. Attenuating pulmonary inflammation with postnatal systemic corticosteroids reduces the incidence of BPD in preterm infants but may be associated with an increased risk of adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes. Local administration of corticosteroids via inhalation might be an effective and safe alternative. OBJECTIVES: To determine if administration of inhalation corticosteroids after the first week of life to preterm infants at high risk of developing BPD is effective and safe in reducing the incidence of death and BPD as separate or combined outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We identified randomised, controlled trials by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library), PubMed (from 1966), EMBASE (from 1974), CINAHL (from 1982), references from retrieved trials and handsearches of journals, all assessed to February 2012. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing inhalation corticosteroids, started ≥ 7 days postnatal age (PNA) but before 36 weeks PMA, to placebo in ventilated and non-ventilated infants at risk of BPD were included. Trials investigating systemic corticosteroids versus inhalation corticosteroids were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data on patient characteristics, trial methodology, and inhalation regimens were collected. The primary outcomes were death or BPD, or both, at 28 days PNA or 36 weeks PMA. Secondary outcomes were short-term respiratory outcomes, such as failure to extubate, total days of mechanical ventilation and oxygen use, and the need for systemic corticosteroids. The original trialists were contacted to verify the validity of extracted data and to provide missing data. All data were analysed using RevMan 5.0.24. When possible, meta-analysis was performed using typical risk ratio (TRR) for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous outcomes along with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Ventilated and non-ventilated participants were analysed separately. MAIN RESULTS: Eight trials randomising 232 preterm infants were included in this review. Inhalation corticosteroids did not reduce the separate or combined outcomes of death or BPD. Furthermore, inhalation steroids did not impact short-term respiratory outcomes such as failure to extubate and total duration of mechanical ventilation or oxygen dependency. There was a trend to a reduced use of systemic corticosteroids in favour of inhalation corticosteroids (TRR 0.51; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.00). There was a paucity of data on short-term and long-term adverse effects. These results should be interpreted with caution because the total number of randomised patients is relatively small and most trials differed considerably in patient characteristics, inhalation therapy and outcome definitions. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of the currently available evidence, inhalation corticosteroids initiated at ≥ 7 days of life for preterm infants at high risk of developing BPD cannot be recommended at this point in time. More and larger randomised, placebo-controlled trials are needed to establish the efficacy and safety of inhalation corticosteroids.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations76
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsFrench-language works237,207