Accurate measurement of oxygen consumption in children undergoing cardiac catheterization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oxygen consumption (VO(2) ) is an important part of hemodynamics using the direct Fick principle in children undergoing cardiac catheterization. Accurate measurement of VO(2) is vital. Obviously, any error in the measurement of VO(2) will translate directly into an equivalent percentage under- or overestimation of blood flows and vascular resistances. It remains common practice to estimate VO(2) values from published predictive equations. Among these, the LaFarge equation is the most commonly used equation and gives the closest estimation with the least bias and limits of agreement. However, considerable errors are introduced by the LaFarge equation, particularly in children younger than 3 years of age. Respiratory mass spectrometry remains the "state-of-the-art" method, allowing highly sensitive, rapid and simultaneous measurement of multiple gas fractions. The AMIS 2000 quadrupole respiratory mass spectrometer system has been adapted to measure VO(2) in children under mechanical ventilation with pediatric ventilators during cardiac catheterization. The small sampling rate, fast response time and long tubes make the equipment a unique and powerful tool for bedside continuous measurement of VO(2) in cardiac catheterization for both clinical and research purposes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".