Patent Ductus Arteriosus (PDA) and Response to Late Surfactant Treatment in Premature InfantsRunning Title: Ductus Arteriosus and Late Surfactant Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective To determine clinical/echocardiography (ECHO) phenotype of response to late surfactant, according to patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) status. Study Design Infants ≤26+6 weeks gestational age (GA), who received ≥1 surfactant dose after postnatal day 6 with known PDA status, were enrolled. Response to surfactant, based on change in respiratory severity score, and relationship with PDA status were evaluated via univariate analysis. Results In total, 35 patients were enrolled (total of 71 doses of surfactant), whose mean weight and GA at birth were 595g(508, 696) and 23.3(22.7, 25) weeks. Positive response to late surfactant was independently associated with absence of PDA [OR 26(2, 334), p=0.01] whereas presence of PDA was associated with negative response [OR 12(1.1, 126), p=0.04]. Conclusions In neonates ≤26+6 weeks gestation response to late surfactant is influenced by PDA status. Future trials should consider PDA status when refining patient selection for late surfactant treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".