MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W125226747

Cardiopulmonary effects of using carbon dioxide for laparoscopic surgery in cats.

2011· article· en· W125226747 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon G. Beazley, Kevin Cosford, Tanya Duke‐Novakovski

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnesthesiaMedicineBlood pressureAcepromazineArterial bloodInsufflationIsofluraneHeart rateNormocapniaVentilation (architecture)Respiratory rateHypercapniaAcidosisInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cardiopulmonary effects of capnoperitoneum were investigated in 8 spontaneously breathing, young adult female cats undergoing laparoscopic pancreatic biopsy (intra-abdominal pressure 12 mmHg). Cats were premedicated with acepromazine and hydromorphone, induced with ketamine and diazepam, and maintained using an end-tidal isoflurane concentration of 1.13% in 100% oxygen. Direct systemic arterial blood pressure, heart and respiratory rates, end-tidal carbon dioxide (CO(2)), and isoflurane were recorded every 5 min before insufflation (baseline), during insufflation of the abdomen with CO(2), and following desufflation. Arterial blood samples were drawn at baseline, at 10 and 30 min of insufflation, and 5 min after desufflation for blood gases. The significant findings (P < 0.05) were as follows: insufflation produced an increase in heart rate (5 to 15 min and at 30 min), mean arterial blood pressure (25 to 30 min), and diastolic arterial blood pressure (10 to 30 min). After desufflation, respiratory rate increased for 15 min. The changes were within physiologically acceptable limits in these healthy, anesthetized cats despite no artificial maintenance of minute ventilation.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.609

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207