MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008327460 · doi:10.1097/mop.0b013e328364d5e6

Cardiac critical care

2013· review· en· W2008327460 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Smith, Peter C. Laussen

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Pediatrics · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicinePerioperativeHeart diseaseCardiac surgeryHeart failureBlood managementIntervention (counseling)Intensive careCardiopulmonary bypassOrgan dysfunctionSurgeryCardiologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The sustained decline in mortality following congenital heart surgery, while important, also has resulted in an emerging focus upon the use of processes and technological developments to reduce early postoperative morbidity. We summarize here recent efforts within the field of pediatric cardiac intensive care to optimize outcomes associated with the perioperative management of the child with congenital heart disease. RECENT FINDINGS: Goal-directed and protocol-driven therapy targeting optimization of oxygen delivery improves outcomes in the management of many populations of critically ill patients, and is now increasingly used following congenital heart surgery with a low associated incidence of organ failure and favorable early survival. Restrictive blood product transfusion practices following congenital heart surgery are showing promise in reducing donor exposures and transfusion-associated morbidities without a resulting increase in end organ dysfunction. Technological developments are affording noninvasive opportunities for earlier recognition and intervention in the deteriorating child, while also providing means for support of the failing myocardium, both in an acute setting during cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and among patients with end-stage heart failure requiring longer-term mechanical circulatory support. SUMMARY: Multi-institutional, prospective evaluation of perioperative management practices, along with patient-specific, integrated electronic health information, provides unique opportunities for investigators to identify and test both processes and technological tools in confronting the most challenging aspects of early postoperative management following congenital heart surgery.

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)0.001
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.012

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in PediatricsSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207