Measurement of forces applied during Macintosh direct laryngoscopy compared with GlideScope <sup>®</sup> videolaryngoscopy*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laryngoscopy can induce stress responses that may be harmful in susceptible patients. We directly measured the force applied to the base of the tongue as a surrogate for the stress response. Force measurements were obtained using three FlexiForce Sensors(®) (Tekscan Inc, Boston, MA, USA) attached along the concave surface of each laryngoscope blade. Twenty-four 24 adult patients of ASA physical status 1-2 were studied. After induction of anaesthesia and neuromuscular blockade, laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation was performed using either a Macintosh or a GlideScope(®) (Verathon, Bothell, WA, USA) laryngoscope. Complete data were available for 23 patients. Compared with the Macintosh, we observed lower median (IQR [range]) peak force (9 (5-13 [3-25]) N vs 20 (14-28 [4-41]) N; p = 0.0001), average force (5 (3-7 [2-19]) N vs 11 (6-16 [1-24]) N; p = 0.0003) and impulse force (98 (42-151 [26-444]) Ns vs 150 (93-207 [17-509]) Ns; p = 0.017) with the GlideScope. Our study shows that the peak lifting force on the base of the tongue during laryngoscopy is less with the GlideScope videolaryngoscope compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".