Protocol for a multisite, observational clinical study of the association between skin colour and pulse oximeter accuracy in children undergoing cardiac catheterisation (PACH study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Prospective, real-world clinical studies of the association between skin color and pulse oximeter (SpO2) accuracy in children are needed to address the limitations of previous research. Such studies are essential for generating evidence for clinicians, regulators and industry. This is the protocol for a multisite study funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL171313; 1 January 2024–31 December 2028). Methods and analysis In this pragmatic, observational study conducted in three large paediatric cardiac catheterisation centres in the USA, children undergoing cardiac catheterisation with directly measured arterial oxygen saturation will be prospectively enrolled. The outcome variable (SpO 2 bias) is the difference between contemporaneous paired measurements of pulse oximetry (SpO 2 ) and the standard reference comparator, arterial blood sample oxygen saturation (SaO 2 ), obtained during the catheterisation procedure. The independent variable is an objective measure of skin colour obtained via spectrophotometry. Our primary analysis is a multivariable regression model testing the relationship between skin colour and SpO 2 bias, after adjusting for covariates. We will also conduct a moderator analysis to identify factors that may affect the magnitude of the association. The target sample size is 584 participants. Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the University of Pennsylvania Institutional Review Board (#854895) under expedited review. Study risks are minimal. Parental permission, and child assent when applicable, are obtained prior to enrolment. In accordance with the NIH Public Access Policy, publications associated with the study will be made publicly available through PubMed Central. The analytic dataset will be contributed to a repository for future use. In collaboration with a children’s hospital-based research family advisory council, interpretation and dissemination of the results for lay, clinical and scientific audiences will be considered. Trial registration number Although not a clinical trial, this observational study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT06529575 ) for public awareness.
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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".