MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1536127457

Abstract 19033: Hyperoxia Reduces Oxygen Consumption in Children With Pulmonary Hypertension

2014· article· en· W1536127457 on OpenAlexaff
Long Guo, Prashant Bobhate, Shreepal Jain, James Y. Coe, Jennifer Rultledge, Ian Adatia

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHyperoxiaOxygenPulmonary hypertensionCardiac outputCardiologyFick principleNitric oxideAnesthesiaCardiac catheterizationRoom air distributionInternal medicineLungHemodynamics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: High inspired oxygen concentration (FiO2) and inhaled nitric oxide (iNO), either alone or in combination, are administered to test pulmonary vasoreactivity in children. Oxygen consumption (VO2) cannot be measured accurately with conventional methods if the inspired FiO2 >0.85 and it is usually assumed that (VO2) does not change with hyperoxia or iNO. Hypothesis: We hypothesised that an inspired FiO2 >0.85 would change VO2 compared with VO2 in room air (RA) and iNO administered with room air and could influence the accuracy of flow calculations using the direct Fick’s equation. Methods: We reviewed retrospectively the cardiac catheterization data obtained between 2009-14 in children with pulmonary hypertension (PH) without cardiac shunts and cardiac output (CO) measured by thermodilution in 3 conditions of RA, with an FiO2 >0.85 and iNO in RA. VO2 was calculated using the Fick equation CO= VO2 / arterial-venous oxygen content difference. Dissolved O2 was included in the calculation. Results: Da...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→