Effects of laryngoscope handle light source on the light intensity from disposable laryngoscope blades
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bench-top study was performed to assess the effects of different laryngoscope handles on the light intensity delivered from disposable metal or plastic laryngoscope blades. The light intensity from both the handle light sources themselves and the combined handle and laryngoscope blade sets was measured using a custom-designed testing system and light meter. Five samples of each disposable blade type were tested and compared with a standard re-usable stainless steel blade using three different handle/light sources (Vital Signs LED, Heine 2.5 V Xenon and 3.5 V Xenon). The light intensity delivered by the disposable blades ranged from 790 to 3846 lux for the different handle types. Overall, the 3.5 V Heine handle delivered the highest light output (p < 0.007) in comparison with the other handles. For the disposable blades, the overall light output was significantly higher from the plastic than the metal blades (p < 0.001).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".