Sustained inflation and chest compression versus 3:1 chest compression to ventilation ratio during cardiopulmonary resuscitation of asphyxiated newborns (SURV1VE): A cluster randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In newborn infants requiring chest compression (CC) in the delivery room (DR) does continuous CC superimposed by a sustained inflation (CC+SI) compared with a 3:1 compression:ventilation (3:1 C:V) ratio decreases time to return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). DESIGN: International, multicenter, prospective, cluster cross-over randomised trial. SETTING: DR in four hospitals in Canada and Austria, PARTICIPANTS: Newborn infants >28 weeks' gestation who required CC. INTERVENTIONS: Hospitals were randomised to CC+SI or 3:1 C:V then crossed over to the other intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was time to ROSC, defined as the duration of CC until an increase in heart rate >60/min determined by auscultation of the heart, which was maintained for 60 s. Sample size of 218 infants (109/group) was sufficient to detect a clinically important 33% reduction (282 vs 420 s of CC) in time to ROSC. Analysis was intention-to-treat. RESULTS: Patient recruitment occurred between 19 October 2017 and 22 September 2022 and randomised 27 infants (CC+SI (n=12), 3:1 C:V (n=15), two (one per group) declined consent). All 11 infants in the CC+SI group and 12/14 infants in the 3:1 C:V group achieved ROSC in the DR. The median (IQR) time to ROSC was 90 (60-270) s and 615 (174-780) s (p=0.0502 (log rank), p=0.16 (cox proportional hazards regression)) with CC+SI and 3:1 C:V, respectively. Mortality was 2/11 (18.2%) with CC+SI versus 8/14 (57.1%) with 3:1 C:V (p=0.10 (Fisher's exact test), OR (95% CI) 0.17; (0.03 to 1.07)). The trial was stopped due to issues with ethics approval and securing trial insurance as well as funding reasons. CONCLUSION: The time to ROSC and mortality was not statistical different between CC+SI and 3:1 C:V. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02858583.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".