MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1999827080 · doi:10.1097/eja.0b013e32835415ea

Neuroscientific Foundations of Anesthesiology

2012· article· en· W1999827080 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
George A. Mashour, Ralph Lydic

Notice bibliographique

RevueEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNeuroscience
ThématiqueAnesthesia and Neurotoxicity Research
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineNeuroscienceNervous systemUnconsciousnessAutonomic nervous systemCognitive scienceAnesthesiologyPeripheral nervous systemCentral nervous systemAnesthesiaEngineering ethicsPsychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This textbook has been edited by a basic scientist and a clinical scientist based in Michigan and the many contributors hail, almost exclusively, from either the USA or Canada. The background of the editorial partnership is reflected in Neuroscientific Foundations of Anesthesiology; the text aims to explore anaesthetics as a branch of neuroscience – combining clinical anaesthesia with the basic science of the nervous system. The philosophical introduction argues that it is anaesthetists, above neurologists or neurosurgeons, who are the clinicians most commonly modulating the nervous system in daily practice and this statement reflects the direction along which the book as been written. The book is structured into seven parts, with a systems-based approach looking initially at the brain, spinal cord, peripheral nervous system and autonomic nervous system; with the final two sections focusing on the neuromuscular junction and then neural toxicity related to the administration of general anaesthetics. The first half of the book, which concentrates on the central and peripheral nervous system, is fairly dry with chapters dedicated to the cellular and molecular effects of general anaesthetics, the thalamocortical system and it's role in unconsciousness, memory processing and anaesthetic-induced mobility. These opening chapters contain little of direct clinical relevance and are much more orientated to the basic science. However, the following sections, which concentrate on the autonomic nervous system and neuromuscular junction, are written with more of a clinical emphasis and contain well presented sections detailing the pharmacology of agents affecting the two systems. The final part of the book looks at the neurotoxic potential of general anaesthetics. This contentious, though contemporary, area is covered initially with a look into the current evidence for anaesthesia-mediated neurotoxicity and highlights areas of rapidly emerging research. Following this, there is an excellent chapter on postoperative cognitive disorders. This chapter begins with three case studies and then a detailed report of up to date evidence surrounding the mechanisms of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) and its distinction from delirium and dementia. It looks at methods to minimise the risks of POCD specific to orthopaedic and cardiac surgery and also has a section on current research in the area. The final chapter is a brief overview of neurodegenerative disorders and anaesthesia, which includes short sections on Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and Huntington's disease. The book is extensively referenced and given the amount of basic science contained in the chapters, it is written in such a way that the wealth information is easily assimilated. The illustrations are plentiful, well presented and compliment the text. Some sections, such as the final chapter on anaesthesia and neurodegenerative disorders, are, however, surprising light and almost come across as an afterthought – especially when compared with the detail of some of the earlier chapters. Overall, this is a thought provoking, interesting text with a refreshing take on anaesthesia's place in the discipline of neuroscience. Although it contains a great deal of useful clinical information, the amount of basic science contained in the earlier chapters give it the feel of a reference text for a department rather than a book to guide clinical practice for the majority of anaesthetists. JH Rosser Specialist Registrar, Sheffield and South Yorkshire School of Anaesthesia, Sheffield, UK MD Wiles Consultant Neuroanaesthetist, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,425
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,495

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,085
Tête enseignante GPT0,312
Écart entre enseignants0,227 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations7
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEuropean Journal of AnaesthesiologyMême sujetAnesthesia and Neurotoxicity ResearchTravaux en français237 207