MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401375139 · doi:10.1136/wjps-2024-000789

Lung-protective ventilation in the management of congenital diaphragmatic hernia

2024· review· en· W4401375139 on OpenAlex

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

VenueWorld Journal of Pediatric Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Diaphragmatic Hernia Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCongenital diaphragmatic herniaMedicineLungVentilation (architecture)Diaphragmatic breathingDiaphragmatic herniaLung ventilationAnesthesiaHerniaIntensive care medicineSurgeryInternal medicinePathologyEngineeringPregnancyBiologyMechanical engineeringFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prioritizing lung-protective ventilation has produced a clear mortality benefit in neonates with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH). While there is a paucity of CDH-specific evidence to support any particular approach to lung-protective ventilation, a growing body of data in adults is beginning to clarify the mechanisms behind ventilator-induced lung injury and inform safer management of mechanical ventilation in general. This review summarizes the adult data and attempts to relate the findings, conceptually, to the CDH population. Critical lessons from the adult studies are that much of the damage done during conventional mechanical ventilation affects normal lung tissue and that most of this damage occurs at the low-volume and high-volume extremes of the respiratory cycle. Consequently, it is important to prevent atelectasis by using sufficient positive end-expiratory pressure while also avoiding overdistention by scaling tidal volume to the amount of functional lung tissue rather than body weight. Paralysis early in acute respiratory distress syndrome improves outcomes, possibly because consistent respiratory mechanics facilitate avoidance of both atelectasis and overdistention-a mechanism that may also apply to the CDH population. Volume-targeted conventional modes may be advantageous in CDH, but determining optimal tidal volume is challenging. Both high-frequency oscillatory ventilation and high-frequency jet ventilation have been used successfully as 'rescue modes' to avoid extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and a prospective trial comparing the two high-frequency modalities as the primary ventilation strategy for CDH is underway.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.288 · 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