MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1842405720 · doi:10.1088/0967-3334/37/2/175

Assessment of distribution of ventilation by electrical impedance tomography in standing horses

2015· article· en· W1842405720 on OpenAlexaff
Tamas D. Ambrisko, Johannes Peter Schramel, Andy Adler, O Kutasi, Zita Makra, Yves Moens

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Measurement · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical and Bioimpedance Tomography
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrical impedance tomographyMedicineVentilation (architecture)SedationPlethysmographNuclear medicineTomographyAnesthesiaRadiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim was to evaluate the feasibility of using electrical impedance tomography (EIT) in horses. Thoracic EIT was used in nine horses. Thoracic and abdominal circumference changes were also measured with respiratory ultrasound plethysmography (RUP). Data were recorded during baseline, rebreathing of CO2 and sedation. Three breaths were selected for analysis from each recording. During baseline breathing, horses regularly took single large breaths (sighs), which were also analysed. Functional EIT images were created using standard deviations (SD) of pixel signals and correlation coefficients (R) of each pixel signal with a reference respiratory signal. Left-to-right ratio, centre-of-ventilation and global-inhomogeneity-index were calculated. RM-ANOVA and Bonferroni tests were used (P < 0.05). Distribution of ventilation shifted towards right during sighs and towards dependent regions during sighs, rebreathing and sedation. Global-inhomogeneity-index did not change for SD but increased for R images during sedation. The sum of SDs for the respiratory EIT signals correlated well with thoracic (r(2) = 0.78) and abdominal (r(2) = 0.82) tidal circumferential changes. Inverse respiratory signals were identified on the images at sternal location and based on reviewing CT images, seemed to correspond to location of gas filled intestines. Application of EIT in standing non-sedated horses is feasible. EIT images may provide physiologically useful information even in situations, such as sighs, that cannot easily be tested by other methods.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations34
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological MeasurementSame topicElectrical and Bioimpedance TomographyFrench-language works237,207