My Patient is Short of Breath: Is there Pleural Fluid, and will PoCUS Help Drain it Safely?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pathological pleural fluid is common in patients presenting to the emergency department, occurring in as many as 17% of patients presenting with shortness of breath, and as many as 20% of patients with blunt thoracic trauma. A typical chest X-ray may fail to identify as much as 175 mL of pleural fluid in the erect position, and as much as 500 mL in the supine position. Point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) on the other hand can detect as little as 20 mL of pleural fluid, and has consistently been shown to have sensitivities and specificities for the detection of pleural fluid close to 100% in both the trauma and critically ill populations. In addition, ultrasound identifies pleural fluid more rapidly than chest X-ray. PoCUS can be used to guide thoracentesis, resulting in improved success rates with decreased complications. Here we describe the evidence supporting the use of PoCUS in the management of pleural fluid collections.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".