MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965313388 · doi:10.1097/aco.0b013e32835afd40

Basic concepts in the use of thoracic and lung ultrasound

2012· review· en· W1965313388 on OpenAlexaff
Éric Piette, Raoul Daoust, André Denault

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Anaesthesiology · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePneumothoraxUltrasoundAnesthesiologyLung ultrasoundRadiologyIntensive care medicineLungPleural effusionMedical physicsPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Recent advances were made in the field of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). Thoracic and lung ultrasound have become a rapid and accurate method of diagnosis of hypoxic diseases. The purpose of this article is to review the recent literature on POCUS, emphasizing on its use in the operating room. RECENT FINDINGS: Many international critical care societies published guidelines on the use of ultrasound in the installation of central venous access. More recently, evidenced-based guidelines on the use of POC lung ultrasound were published. Lung ultrasound has shown its superiority over conventional chest radiography in the diagnosis of many disorders of significant importance in anesthesiology, particularly the pneumothorax. SUMMARY: POC thoracic and lung ultrasound is used in many critical medicine fields. The aim of this review is to describe the basic lung ultrasound technique and the knowledge required in order to diagnose and treat the hypoxic patient. Emphasis is on disorder such as pleural effusion, alveolar interstitial disease, as well as pneumothorax, which is of particular importance in the field of anesthesiology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.339
GPT teacher head0.510
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations86
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in AnaesthesiologySame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207