MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253812758 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005383

Antithrombin for respiratory distress syndrome in preterm infants

2005· reference-entry· en· W4253812758 on OpenAlexaff
Dirk Bassler, David Millar, Barbara Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2005
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRespiratory distressMedicinePediatricsGestational ageBirth weightSubgroup analysisPlaceboLow birth weightAntithrombinInternal medicinePregnancyMeta-analysisAnesthesiaAlternative medicineHeparin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To compare mortality in the first 28 days of life in preterm infants with RDS treated with AT or placebo or no treatment. As activities of AT tend to be different depending on gestational age and severity of RDS, subgroup analyses by birth weight and severity of RDS will be considered. If studies published in the pre‐ and postsurfactant era will be identified, a subgroup analysis by availability of surfactant will be performed.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewlow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Systematic reviewhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.011
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.005

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.371
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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations4
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsSame topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsFrench-language works237,207