MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008592000 · doi:10.1136/ebn.11.3.82

Review: prone positioning improved oxygenation on ventilation more than supine positioning in ARDSCommentary

2008· letter· en· W2008592000 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicky Hewitt, Tracey Bucknall

Bibliographic record

VenueEvidence-Based Nursing · 2008
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupine positionARDSProne positionMedicineMechanical ventilationAcute respiratory distressPneumoniaRandomized controlled trialOxygenationVentilation (architecture)Intensive care medicineAnesthesiaSurgeryLungInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C M Martin Dr C M Martin, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada; cmartin1@uwo.ca In patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) on mechanical ventilation, does prone positioning result in better outcomes than supine positioning? Studies selected compared prone positioning (⩾6 h/d) with supine positioning in adults who had ARDS and were mechanically ventilated. Outcomes were mortality, improvement in oxygenation, days on mechanical ventilation, and ventilator-associated pneumonia. PubMed, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (to Nov 2006); and reference lists were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Experts were consulted. 5 …

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEvidence-Based NursingSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207