MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414475411 · doi:10.1016/j.resplu.2025.101109

Volume targeted mask ventilation during simulated neonatal resuscitation – A randomized crossover manikin study

2025· article· en· W4414475411 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueResuscitation Plus · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeonatal Respiratory Health Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alexandra HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeonatal resuscitationLeakVolume (thermodynamics)Ventilation (architecture)Crossover studyResuscitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To compare mask positive pressure ventilation (PPV) provided by pressure guided devices (i.e., T-Piece) with or without a respiratory function monitor (RFM) with ventilator-based volume-targeted ventilation (VTV) using a VN500 Draeger ventilator or the NextStep TM , a novel ventilation device designed for the delivery room. Prospective, randomized, crossover, simulation study. Following orientation to ventilation devices, participants were randomized to order of four ventilation devices (NextStep TM , VN500 Draeger ventilator, T-piece PPV with RFM visible, and T-piece PPV with RFM masked) and order of four simulation scenarios. The study was performed in a neonatal resuscitation room within a level 3 neonatal intensive care unit. Participants were trained neonatal resuscitation providers or instructors with experience as team leader. Semi-automated, ventilator-based volume-targeted mask PPV (VTV-PPV) (NextStep TM or Draeger Ventilator) was compared to manual PPV via a T-piece device (RFM either visible or masked). Primary outcome was reduction in mask leak with the NextStep TM compared to the other devices. Thirty-two healthcare professionals [25 (78.1%) were female and 7 (21.9%) were male] participated. The median (interquartile range) mask leak was significantly lower with VTV-PPV with NextStep TM [6 (1-12)%] compared to the Draeger Ventilator [24 (25-38)%, p=0.01], T-Piece with RFM [18 (9-33)%, p=0.0088], and T-Piece without RFM [32 (12-57)%, p=>0.0001]. The median (IQR) delivered tidal volume was not different between groups, although the NextStep TM had less tidal volume variation compared to all other groups and peak inflation pressure was significantly lower with VTV-PPV with NextStep TM compared to all other groups. In a neonatal manikin model, VTV-PPV with the NextStep TM using a two-hand hold reduced mask leak compared to the T-piece without RFM guidance.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.427
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.337 · 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