Late Breaking Abstract - In-vitro evaluation of a neonatal adaptation of an adult oscillometer for respiratory mechanics assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: Respiratory oscillometry assesses respiratory mechanics independently of patient efforts. Existing commercially-available oscillometry devices are designed for children aged > 3yrs, preventing their use in neonatal care. We aimed to evaluate the in-vitro accuracy of a novel oscillometer that addresses specific neonatal requirements such as very low dead space and highly accurate flow sensing. Methods: A Resmon PRO FULL oscillometer (RESTECH Srl) was modified by connecting a breathing circuit tube, an intentional leak, proximal flow and pressure sensor and a neonatal face mask to the device patient connector, resulting in a dead space <1.5 ml/kg with a bias flow of 8 L/min for CO2 washout. An active test lung made of mesh-type resistors (15, 25, and 40 cmH2Os/l) to simulate airway resistance (Rrs) and acrylic glass cylinders (0.5, 1.0, and 3 L) to simulate reactance (Xrs) was configured to replicate spontaneous neonatal breathing patterns. Measured respiratory impedance at 8 and 10 Hz were compared with theoretical values (Franken et al., 1981). Results: Rrs and Xrs at 8 and 10 Hz closely matched expected values, as for breathing pattern metrics, with measurements errors staying within the recommended limits (Table). Conclusion: The modified oscillometer accurately measures respiratory impedance and breathing pattern indexes in in-vitro models of infants from 2.5 kg to approximately three years old. erj;64/suppl_68/PA4086/F1 F1 F1
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".