MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970566888 · doi:10.7182/pit2014737

Deceased Donor Hyperglycemia and Liver Graft Dysfunction

2014· article· en· W1970566888 on OpenAlexaff
Silvia Perez-Protto, Luke F. Reynolds, Jarrod E. Dalton, Taro Taketomi, Samuel A. Irefin, Brian M. Parker, Cristiano Quintini, Daniel I. Sessler

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Transplantation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioContext (archaeology)Liver transplantationLiver dysfunctionDiabetes mellitusIncidence (geometry)Hepatic dysfunctionInternal medicineLogistic regressionSurgeryGastroenterologyTransplantationEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Hyperglycemia is common in deceased donors, and provokes numerous adverse events in hepatocytic mitochondria. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether hyperglycemia in deceased donors is associated with graft dysfunction after orthotopic liver transplant. METHODS: Charts on 572 liver transplants performed at the Cleveland Clinic between January 2005 and October 2010 were reviewed. The primary measure was time-weighted averages of donors' glucose measurements. Liver graft dysfunction was defined as (1) primary nonfunction as indicated by death or retransplant or (2) liver graft dysfunction as indicated by an aspartate amino transferase level greater than 2000 U/L or prothrombin time greater than 16 seconds during the first postoperative week. The relationship of interest was estimated by using a multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: The incidence of graft dysfunction was 25%. No significant relationship was found between the range of donor glucose measurements and liver graft dysfunction after donor characteristics were adjusted for (P= .14, Wald test, adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] for liver graft dysfunction corresponding to a relative doubling in time-weighted average for donor glucose of 1.43 [0.89-2.30]). The results thus do not suggest that strict glucose control in donors is likely to improve graft quality.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress in TransplantationSame topicOrgan Transplantation Techniques and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207