• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

出生时足月儿或晚期早产儿复苏使用空气与补充氧气的比较。

Air versus supplemental oxygen for resuscitation of term or late preterm infants at birth.

作者信息

Rüegger Christoph M, Dawson Jennifer A, Cracknell Jane, Fiander Michelle, Davis Peter G, Gaertner Vincent D

机构信息

Newborn Research, Department of Neonatology, University Hospital and University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.

Newborn Research Centre, Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Dec 20;12(12):CD014781. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014781.

DOI:10.1002/14651858.CD014781
PMID:39704284
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11660226/
Abstract

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: Primary objective To assess the benefits and harms of air compared with supplemental oxygen for resuscitation of term or late preterm infants at birth in reducing rates of mortality and long-term neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI). Secondary objectives To assess whether the benefits and harms of air compared with supplemental oxygen differ according to different oxygen concentrations, gestational age (GA), whether oxygen was titrated to saturation curves and the income of the study country.

摘要

这是一项Cochrane系统评价(干预措施)的方案。目标如下:主要目标评估与补充氧气相比,空气用于足月儿或晚期早产儿出生时复苏在降低死亡率和长期神经发育障碍(NDI)发生率方面的益处和危害。次要目标评估与补充氧气相比,空气的益处和危害是否因不同氧气浓度、胎龄(GA)、是否根据饱和度曲线调整氧气以及研究国家的收入水平而有所不同。

相似文献

1
Air versus supplemental oxygen for resuscitation of term or late preterm infants at birth.出生时足月儿或晚期早产儿复苏使用空气与补充氧气的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Dec 20;12(12):CD014781. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014781.
2
Lower versus higher oxygen concentrations titrated to target oxygen saturations during resuscitation of preterm infants at birth.出生时对早产儿进行复苏期间,将较低与较高氧浓度滴定至目标氧饱和度。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 4;5(5):CD010239. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010239.pub2.
3
Neurodevelopmental outcomes of preterm infants resuscitated with different oxygen concentration at birth.出生时用不同氧浓度复苏的早产儿的神经发育结局。
J Perinatol. 2017 Oct;37(10):1141-1147. doi: 10.1038/jp.2017.83. Epub 2017 Jun 8.
4
Restricted versus liberal oxygen exposure for preventing morbidity and mortality in preterm or low birth weight infants.限制与自由氧暴露对预防早产或低出生体重婴儿发病和死亡的影响
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001(4):CD001077. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001077.
5
Restricted versus liberal oxygen exposure for preventing morbidity and mortality in preterm or low birth weight infants.限制与自由氧暴露对预防早产或低出生体重儿发病和死亡的影响
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;2009(1):CD001077. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001077.pub2.
6
Preterm infants are not small term infants: Should the resuscitation of a <26-week preterm infant be initiated with 100% oxygen?早产儿并非足月儿:孕周<26周的早产儿复苏时应从100%氧气开始吗?
J Perinatol. 2024 Oct;44(10):1387-1389. doi: 10.1038/s41372-024-02073-4. Epub 2024 Jul 30.
7
Air versus oxygen for resuscitation of infants at birth.出生时婴儿复苏用空气与氧气的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Apr 18;2005(2):CD002273. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002273.pub3.
8
Survival and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes of Preterms Resuscitated With Different Oxygen Fractions.不同氧分数复苏的早产儿的生存及神经发育结局
Pediatrics. 2016 Dec;138(6). doi: 10.1542/peds.2016-1405. Epub 2016 Nov 16.
9
Early versus late discontinuation of oxygen in preterm or low birth weight infants.早产或低出生体重婴儿早期与晚期停止吸氧的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001(4):CD001076. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001076.
10
Effects of targeting lower versus higher arterial oxygen saturations on death or disability in preterm infants.针对较低与较高动脉血氧饱和度对早产儿死亡或残疾的影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 11;4(4):CD011190. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011190.pub2.

本文引用的文献

1
Physiology of neonatal resuscitation: Giant strides with small breaths.新生儿复苏生理学:小呼吸带来巨大进步。
Semin Perinatol. 2022 Oct;46(6):151620. doi: 10.1016/j.semperi.2022.151620. Epub 2022 May 21.
2
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews.PRISMA 2020 声明:系统评价报告的更新指南。
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
3
PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews.PRISMA 2020 解释和说明:系统评价报告的更新指南和范例。
BMJ. 2021 Mar 29;372:n160. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n160.
4
An evaluation of Cochrane Crowd found that crowdsourcing produced accurate results in identifying randomized trials.评价 Cochrane Crowd 的结果表明,众包在识别随机试验方面产生了准确的结果。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 May;133:130-139. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.01.006. Epub 2021 Jan 18.
5
Machine learning reduced workload with minimal risk of missing studies: development and evaluation of a randomized controlled trial classifier for Cochrane Reviews.机器学习减少了工作量,同时最小化了漏检研究的风险:一项用于 Cochrane 综述的随机对照试验分类器的开发和评估。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 May;133:140-151. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.11.003. Epub 2020 Nov 7.
6
Neonatal Life Support 2020 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science With Treatment Recommendations.《2020 年新生儿生命支持:心肺复苏与心血管急救科学及治疗建议国际共识》
Resuscitation. 2020 Nov;156:A156-A187. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2020.09.015. Epub 2020 Oct 21.
7
Cochrane Centralised Search Service showed high sensitivity identifying randomized controlled trials: A retrospective analysis.考克兰中央检索服务对识别随机对照试验具有较高的敏感性:一项回顾性分析。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Nov;127:142-150. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.08.008. Epub 2020 Aug 13.
8
Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline.系统评价中不进行荟萃分析的综合 (SWiM):报告指南。
BMJ. 2020 Jan 16;368:l6890. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l6890.
9
GRADE guidelines 26: informative statements to communicate the findings of systematic reviews of interventions.GRADE 指南 26:用于沟通干预措施系统评价结果的信息性陈述。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Mar;119:126-135. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.10.014. Epub 2019 Nov 9.
10
RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials.《随机对照试验偏倚风险评估工具2:修订版》
BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898. doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898.