MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PP032 Topic: AS03–Disaster Medicine/Trauma, Triage and Transport/Mass Critical Care/Pandemics/Medicine in War Zones/Other: THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CONTINUOUS POSITIVE AIRWAY PRESSURE IN A HUMANITARIAN CONTEXT: THE EXPERIENCE OF MÉDECINS SANS FRONTIÈRES IN MOSUL, IRAQ

2024· article· en· W4404041421 on OpenAlexaff
T Haj-Hassan, Megahed Amer, K Al-Jubori, Hengky Salim, Ayesha Nasir Hameed, Karam Thanon, JE Dewez

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Critical Care Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTriagePandemicContext (archaeology)Mass-casualty incidentDisaster medicineMass CasualtyMilitary medicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)AirwaySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakMedical emergencyIntensive care medicinePoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsSurgeryDiseaseInternal medicineVirologyLawInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims & Objectives: Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) is recommended for neonates with respiratory distress. CPAP is widely used in high-income countries, but less so in low- and middle-income settings. We aimed to report our experience in a humanitarian setting. Methods: MSF implemented CPAP in a basic neonatal unit in Mosul following the request of the local team. Implementation of two bubble CPAP machines included initial training and refresher training one year later. Clinical data was recorded over 16 months (13 April 2021- 21 July 2022). Descriptive statistics were used to assess the feasibility and outcomes of using CPAP in this setting. Results: CPAP was well accepted by most healthcare workers and parents. 93 neonates were placed on CPAP. The main indications were respiratory distress syndrome, pneumonia, transient tachypnea, and meconium aspiration (46%, 22%, 16%, and 14% respectively). Average duration on CPAP was 53 hours. 63% of patients recovered, 8% were discharged against medical advice, 9% were referred, and 15% died. Among patients who died, 41% had a contraindication to CPAP, and the initiation of CPAP was delayed in 53% of patients. Complications included minor nasal lesions (17%), irritability (8%), and pneumothoraces (5%). Conclusions: Using CPAP in a humanitarian setting is feasible. Most patients improved and were discharged home. 5% of patients developed pneumothoraces, which is in keeping with other reports. Among patients who did not improve, a significant proportion had contraindications to CPAP initiation and/or were placed on CPAP in extremis, highlighting the importance of clear indication criteria and training. Keywords: CPAP, Humanitarian setting, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure, Paediatric Emergency & Critical Care

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric Critical Care MedicineSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207