Effect of Physiotherapy Intervention on Improvement of Respiratory Function and Degree of Respiratory Distress Reduction in Neonates With Respiratory Distress Syndrome: Protocol for a Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (NRDS), a common and serious illness in preterm infants, is characterized by lung immaturity and inadequate surfactant production. Even though improvements in neonatal care have increased survival rates, optimizing supportive therapies such as physiotherapy is still essential to improve respiratory outcomes and overall recovery. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of physiotherapy therapies in enhancing respiratory function and clinical outcomes in neonates with NRDS. Methods: PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols) guidelines will be followed for conducting a systematic review. Studies assessing the effects of physiotherapy therapies on newborns with NRDS, such as respiratory exercises, manual chest compressions, percussion, vibration, and postural drainage, high-frequency oscillation of the chest wall, cough stimulation, or suctioning will be included. A comprehensive search of electronic databases, including PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library, to find pertinent observational studies, experimental studies, and randomized controlled trials, will be conducted. Important outcomes will be respiratory function metrics, oxygen saturation levels, length of mechanical ventilation, occurrence of problems, and overall newborn outcomes. Results: Exact numbers are not accessible at this time, as the review is hypothetical and has not yet been conducted. In order to inform clinical procedures and future studies, the results will contain data on respiratory improvement, intervention kinds, safety profiles, and the best times and frequencies for physical therapy in neonates with respiratory distress syndrome. Conclusions: This review will provide a comprehensive understanding of the role of physiotherapy in managing NRDS and its impact on clinical outcomes in neonates. The findings may guide clinical practice and inform future research on noninvasive strategies for improving neonatal respiratory 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 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 | 0.042 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.024 | 0.028 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.005 |
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".