Chronic lung disease in preterm infants receiving various modes of noninvasive ventilation at ≤30 weeks’ postmenstrual age
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To determine the incidence of chronic lung disease (CLD) in mechanically ventilated infants who were born at <29 weeks’ gestational age (GA), extubated to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or nasal intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), and treated with CPAP/NIPPV alone, changed to heated humidified high flow nasal cannula (HHHFNC), or exposed to a combination of CPAP/NIPPV and HHHFNC at ≤30 weeks’ postmenstrual age (PMA). Study design: Retrospective cohort study of infants born at <29 weeks’ GA admitted to tertiary Canadian neonatal intensive care units between 2011 and 2015. Infants were grouped according to the type of noninvasive ventilation they received at ≤30 weeks’ PMA: CPAP/NIPPV alone, HHHFNC alone, or a combination of both. Results: Of the 2378 eligible infants, 1091 (46%) were on CPAP/NIPPV alone, 173 (7.3%) were on HHHFNC alone, and 1114 (47%) were on a combination of CPAP/NIPPV and HHHFNC at ≤30 weeks’ PMA until weaned to room air or low flow nasal cannula. After adjustment for confounders, infants in both the CPAP/NIPPV (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]; 2.37 [1.18, 4.79]) and Combination (3.47 [2.06, 5.86]) groups had higher odds of developing CLD than infants in the HHHFNC group. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that infants transitioned to HHHFNC ≤30 weeks’ PMA after extubation to CPAP/NIPPV were associated with a lower odds of CLD than infants maintained on CPAP/NIPPV or a combination of CPAP/NIPPV and HHHFNC.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".