MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1925884653 · doi:10.1111/pan.12751

A systematic review and meta‐analysis of acute severe complications of pediatric anesthesia

2015· review· en· W1925884653 on OpenAlexaff
A. MirGhassemi, Victor M. Neira, Lee‐Anne Ufholz, Nick Barrowman, Jamila Mulla, Carol L. Bradbury, M. Dylan Bould

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Anesthesia · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMEDLINEData extractionCINAHLIntensive care medicineMeta-analysisPerioperativePopulationAirwayEmergency medicineSurgeryPsychological interventionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Quantification of acute severe complications of pediatric anesthesia is essential to plan clinical guidelines and educational curricula. AIM: Our aim was to identify complications in terms of frequency and outcomes. METHODS: We defined acute severe complications as an unexpected perioperative event, which without intervention by the anesthesiologist within 30 min may lead to disability or death. A systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Screening and data extraction were performed independently. Assessment of bias was conducted using GRADE guidelines. RESULTS: Of 3002 abstracts, 25 met all inclusion criteria. The most common acute severe complications in pediatric anesthesia are related to airway management and respiratory system, followed by cardiovascular events. There was a great variation in reporting the methods, particularly poor definitions of diagnostic criteria for complications. Data were heterogeneous and pooled estimates may not be generalizable. Some studies failed to define potential source of bias, explain how missing data were addressed, describe acute severe complications, and had incomplete postoperative follow-up. CONCLUSION: The data on pediatric anesthesia acute severe complications are poorly defined with large variation in the specificity of diagnostic reporting even within studies. We suggest that it is vital for future studies in this area to be based on a standardized system of diagnostic reporting (possibly with a hierarchical system of coding) with adequate description of population details to describe heterogeneity of data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric AnesthesiaSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207