Respiratory oscillometry in infants: methodological aspects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<bold>Background:</bold> Oscillometry in infant lung function is of emerging potential but is challenged by special conditions (sleep, position, nasal breathing and high mechanical impedance) not encountered in older age groups. <bold>Aims:</bold> To investigate the effects of face mask positioning and head support on respiratory impedance (Zrs) in infants. <bold>Methods:</bold> Sedated infants (n=21) who were born preterm (25-37 wk gestational age) were evaluated longitudinally as outpatients at corrected-ages of 5-6 (visit 1; V1) and 12 months (V2). A device in development (N-100; Thorasys Inc., Montreal, CA) was employed to measure Zrs in the 7-41-Hz range. The head/mask support was accomplished with 1 hand (1H) or 2 hands (2H); >3 regular segments of 7 s were collected in each condition. The Zrs spectra were processed to correct (corr) for the face mask shunt. Mean resistance (R), compliance (C), and resonance frequency (fres) were estimated via model fitting. <bold>Results:</bold> Uncorrected Zrs failed to exhibit fres in 12 (V1) and 1 (V2) subjects and resulted in unexpectedly low C values. V1 and V2 results reflected growth (Table 1). There was no significant difference in any measure with 1H and 2H support (signed rank test). <table-wrap><object-id>erj;64/suppl_68/PA1462/TB1</object-id><object-id>T1</object-id><object-id>TB1</object-id><table><colgroup><col></col><col></col><col></col><col></col><col></col></colgroup><tbody><tr><td></td><td>V1</td><td>V1corr</td><td>V2</td><td>V2corr</td></tr><tr><td>R (cmH<sub>2</sub>O.s/L)</td><td>31.9 [27.2;36.3]</td><td>33.4 [28.9;39.2]*</td><td>25.7 [19.8;29.8]<sup># †</sup></td><td>23.2 [19.7;27.5]* <sup>††</sup></td></tr><tr><td>C (mL/cmH<sub>2</sub>O)</td><td>1.08 [0.86;1.32]</td><td>1.56 [1.13;1.90]**</td><td>1.62 [1.23;2.10]<sup># †</sup></td><td>1.89 [1.56;2.84]** <sup>†</sup></td></tr><tr><td>fres (Hz)</td><td>53.1 [39.3;61.0]</td><td>17.6 [16.1;23.6]*</td><td>28.6 [23.1;37.8]<sup>#</sup></td><td>16.4 [13.4;18.0]** <sup>†</sup></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap> Table 1. Median [25%;75%] values of Zrs measures. <italic>p</italic> corr <italic>vs</italic> uncorr: <0.05*, <0.001**; V2 <italic>vs</italic> V1: <0.05<sup>†</sup>, <0.001<sup>††</sup> <bold>Conclusion:</bold> Correction for the face mask shunt impedance provided more realistic Zrs spectra and derived measures, especially at high Zrs values.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".