MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400995981 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2024-087998

Selective early medical treatment of the patent ductus arteriosus in extremely low gestational age infants: a pilot randomised controlled trial protocol (SMART-PDA)

2024· article· en· W4400995981 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Souvik Mitra, Audrey Hébert, Michael Castaldo, Tim Disher, Walid El‐Naggar, Santokh Dhillon, Ziad Alhassen, Jenny Koo, Anup Katheria, Abbas Hyderi, Kumar Kumaran, Marjorie Makoni, Dany E. Weisz, Amish Jain, Fabiana Bacchini, A. W. W. Cameron, Tara Hatfield, Jon Dorling, Patrick J. McNamara, Lehana Thabane

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpactHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreEVERSANA (Canada)University of British ColumbiaCanadian Dermatology FoundationUniversity of AlbertaUniversité LavalIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
FundersInstitute of Human Development, Child and Youth HealthIWK Health CentreCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDalhousie UniversityDalhousie Medical Research Foundation
KeywordsMedicineDuctus arteriosusProtocol (science)Gestational ageRandomized controlled trialPediatricsPregnancyObstetricsAlternative medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) is the most common cardiovascular problem that develops in extremely preterm infants and is associated with poor clinical outcomes. Uncertainty exists on whether early pharmacotherapeutic treatment of a clinically symptomatic and echocardiography-confirmed haemodynamically significant PDA in extremely preterm infants improves outcomes. Given the wide variation in the approach to PDA treatment in this gestational age (GA) group, a randomised trial design is essential to address the question. Before embarking on a large RCT in this vulnerable population, it is important to establish the feasibility of such a trial. Methods and analysis Design: a multi-centre, open-labelled, parallel-designed pilot randomised controlled trial. Participants: preterm infants born <26 weeks of gestation with a PDA diagnosed within 72 hours after birth. Intervention (selective early medical treatment (SMART) strategy): selective early pharmacological treatment of a moderate-severe PDA shunt (identified based on pre-defined clinical signs and routine screening echocardiography) within the first 72 postnatal hours with provision for repeat treatment if moderate-severe shunt persists. Comparison (early conservative management strategy): no treatment of PDA in the first postnatal week. Primary outcomes: (1) proportion of eligible infants recruited during the study period; (2) proportion of randomised infants treated outside of protocol-mandated therapy. Sites and sample size: the study is being conducted in seven neonatal intensive care units across Canada and the USA with a target of 100 randomised infants. Analysis: the primary feasibility outcomes will be expressed as proportions. A pre-planned Bayesian analysis will be conducted for secondary clinical outcomes such as mortality, severe intraventricular haemorrhage, procedural PDA closure and chronic lung disease to aid stakeholders including parent representatives decide on the appropriateness of enrolling this vulnerable population in a larger trial if the feasibility of recruitment in the pilot trial is established. Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the IWK Research Ethics Board (#1027298) and six additional participating sites. On the completion of the study, results will be presented at national and international meetings, published in peer-reviewed journals and incorporated into existing systematic reviews. Trial registration number NCT05011149 (WHO Trial Registration Data Set in Appendix A). Protocol version Ver 7.2 (dated July 19, 2023).

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicCardiovascular Conditions and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207