MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407292957 · doi:10.1152/ajplung.00312.2024

Characteristics, triggers, treatments, and experimental models of neonatal acute respiratory distress syndrome

2025· review· en· W4407292957 on OpenAlexafffund
Atefeh Mohammadi, Danièle De Luca, Estelle B. Gauda

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and Molecular Physiology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsMedicineARDSIntensive care medicineNecrotizing enterocolitisSepsisConsensus conferencePneumoniaChorioamnionitisAcute respiratory distressDiffuse alveolar damageLungImmunologyPediatricsInternal medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neonatal acute respiratory distress syndrome (NARDS) is a severe and potentially life-threatening form of lung injury recently defined by the International Neonatal ARDS Consensus. It is marked by extensive lung inflammation and damage to the alveolar epithelium and vascular endothelium. NARDS can be triggered by direct inflammatory exposures, such as pneumonia and aspiration, and indirect exposures, including sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis, and chorioamnionitis. This review provides clinicians and researchers with the latest insights on NARDS. We adopt a cross-disciplinary approach to discuss the diagnostic criteria, pathobiology, triggers, epidemiology, and treatments of NARDS. In addition, we summarize existing clinical studies and advanced preclinical models that help address current knowledge gaps. Future research should focus on standardizing the Montreux consensus definition of NARDS in preclinical and clinical studies, identifying biomarkers, developing prediction models, and exploring novel therapies for affected infants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Lung Cellular and Molecular PhysiologySame topicNeonatal Respiratory Health ResearchFrench-language works237,207