MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308053547 · doi:10.1002/ppul.26223

Accuracy of lung and diaphragm ultrasound in predicting successful extubation in extremely preterm infants: A prospective observational study

2022· article· en· W4308053547 on OpenAlex
Nada Mohsen, Nehad Nasef, Mohab Ghanem, Telford Yeung, Veena Deekonda, Carmen Ma, Dilkash Kajal, Michelle Baczynski, Amish Jain, Adel Mohamed

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Pulmonology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWindsor Regional HospitalMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGestational ageReceiver operating characteristicConfidence intervalProspective cohort studyMechanical ventilationDiaphragmatic breathingLogistic regressionUltrasoundDiaphragm (acoustics)Area under the curveAnesthesiaSurgeryInternal medicineRadiologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Chest ultrasound has emerged as a promising tool in predicting extubation readiness in adults and children, yet its utility in preterm infants is lacking. Our aim was to assess the utility of lung ultrasound severity score (LUSS) and diaphragmatic function in predicting extubation readiness in extremely preterm infants. STUDY DESIGN: In this prospective cohort study, preterm infants < 28 weeks gestational age (GA) who received invasive mechanical ventilation for ≥12 h were enrolled. Chest ultrasound was performed before extubation. The primary outcome was lung ultrasound accuracy for predicting successful extubation at 3 days. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were done using SPSS version 22. RESULTS: We enrolled 45 infants, of whom 36 (80%) were successfully extubated. GA and postmenstrual age (PMA) at extubation were significantly higher in the successful group. The LUSS was significantly lower in the successful group compared to failed group (11.9 ± 3.2 vs. 19.1 ± 3.1 p < 0.001). The two groups had no statistically significant difference in diaphragmatic excursion or diaphragmatic thickness fraction. Logistic regression analysis controlling for GA and PMA at extubation showed LUSS was an independent predictor for successful extubation (odd ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval [0.23-0.9], p = 0.02). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.95 (p ˂ 0.001) for LUSS, and a cut-off value of ≥15 had 95% sensitivity and 85% specificity in detecting extubation failure. CONCLUSION: In extremely preterm infants, lung ultrasound has good accuracy for predicting successful extubation. However, diaphragmatic measurements were not reliable predictors.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.302 · 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