MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1552945849 · doi:10.3233/ch-141810

Clinical evaluation of the intestinal microcirculation using sidestream dark field imaging – Recommendations of a round table meeting

2014· article· en· W1552945849 on OpenAlex
Christine Lehmann, Isa Salo Abdo, Hartmut Kern, Liivi Maddison, D. Pavlović, Nivin Sharawi, Joel Starkopf, Richard Hall, Paul M. Johnson, Lara Williams

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrocirculationMedicineIntestinal mucosaImage qualityRound tableIleostomyPathologySurgeryComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRadiologyInternal medicineImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In clinical setting, Sidestream Dark Field (SDF) imaging has provided unprecedented insights into the gut microcirculation mainly by studying the intestinal mucosa of patients with ileostomies. Visualizing microvascular structure and function of ileal mucosa at the bedside brings unique opportunity for clinical research, particularly in critically ill patients. Several papers that were focused on intestinal microcirculation, used different methods of assessment because an accepted scoring systems does not exist so far and it is no surprise that it is rather difficult to compare the results from these studies. The present paper presents recommendations concerning specific aspects of image acquisition and proposes some parameters for the description of the intestinal microcirculation in human studies, as suggested by the participants of a round table meeting. METHODS: The round table meeting participants reviewed all relevant literature, discussed various aspects of image acquisition by SDF technology in patients with ileostomy and parameters for the description of intestinal mucosa microcirculation. Selected key conditions for high quality and reproducible image recordings were identified. To evaluate quality of intestinal microcirculation, selected parameters and scoring system were suggested and described. RESULTS: For image acquisition in ileostomies, five key points were proposed: optimal timing, optimal SDF device probe positioning, optimal stabilization, optimal number and length of acquired video recordings, and optimal avoidance of pressure artefacts. With regard to image analysis, simplified set of quantitative and qualitative parameters for the description of the intestinal mucosa microcirculation for the clinical studies has been proposed: vessels per villus, microvascular flow index, proportion of perfused villi, and borders of villi. The proposed parameters can be included in a semi-quantitative scoring system; however, this scoring system needs further validation. This simplified analysis does not require sophisticated software and can be performed manually on the video screen. CONCLUSION: We propose a simple methodology for image acquisition and suggest specific microvascular parameters to analyze SDF imaging studies of the intestinal mucosa microcirculation in patients with ileostomy. Proposed scoring system needs to be validated in further clinical studies.

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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.376 · 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