Diaphragmatic ultrasound and patent ductus arteriosus in the newborn: A retrospective case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) and diaphragmatic dysfunction are frequently seen in newborn infants but their relationship remains unknown. We aimed to use point of care ultrasound to compare diaphragmatic kinetics in infants with a PDA compared to in those without a PDA. Methods M-mode ultrasonography was used to measure the mean inspiratory velocity (VI) in newborn infants with and without a haemodynamically significant PDA admitted in the Neonatal Unit at King's College Hospital during a three month period. Results Seventeen diaphragmatic ultrasound studies were reviewed from 14 infants with a median (IQR) gestational age of 26.1 (25.8–30.6) weeks, birth weight of 780 (660–1385) gr at a postnatal age of 18 (14–34) days. Eight scans had evidence of a PDA. The median (IQR) VI was significantly lower in scans with a PDA [1.01 (0.78–1.86) cm/s] compared to the ones without a PDA [3.21 (2.80–3.59) cm/s, p < 0.001]. The median (IQR) gestational age was lower in infants with a PDA [25.8 (25.6–27.3) weeks] compared to infants without a PDA [29.0 (26.1–35.1) weeks, p = 0.007]. Using multivariable linear regression analysis the VI was independently associated with a PDA (adjusted p < 0.001) but not with the gestational age (adjusted p = 0.659). Conclusions Patent ductus arteriosus was associated with a lower mean inspiratory velocity in neonates and this effect was independent of gestational age.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".