MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025208283 · doi:10.1097/aco.0b013e328010107e

Outcomes in day surgery

2006· review· en· W2025208283 on OpenAlexaff
Ilia Shnaider, Frances Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Anaesthesiology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNausea and vomiting management
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoToronto Western Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNauseaAmbulatoryVomitingAdverse effectHealth carePatient satisfactionIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaPostoperative nausea and vomitingSurgeryEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To summarize and examine the updated published results on the outcome measures that can be used to assess the quality of ambulatory surgery and anesthesia. RECENT FINDINGS: Major morbidity and mortality following ambulatory surgery is exceedingly low. Cancellations and delays may have a negative impact on the patients, healthcare personnel and the organizations. Minor cardiovascular adverse events are the most common intraoperatively and are associated with preexisting cardiovascular diseases and elderly patients. Respiratory events postoperatively are associated with obesity, smoking and asthma. Also, pain is a common cause for longer postoperative stay, unanticipated admission and readmission. Postoperative nausea and vomiting occurs in 30% of patients and strongly affects patient satisfaction. Furthermore, prolonged stays are mainly caused by surgical factors, or minor symptoms like pain or nausea. Surgical factors are also the main causes of unanticipated hospital admission. The type of surgery and the 24 h postoperative symptoms may affect the degree of return to daily living function. Also, patient satisfaction affects the outcome of healthcare and the use of healthcare services. SUMMARY: Ambulatory surgery, as currently practiced, provides quality care that is cost-effective. Minor adverse events such as pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting are still common, and improvement could be targeted in these areas.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations124
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in AnaesthesiologySame topicNausea and vomiting managementFrench-language works237,207