A Comparison of the GlideScope Video Laryngoscope and Standard Direct Laryngoscopy in Children With Immobilized Cervical Spine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Airway management in children with cervical spine may make direct laryngoscopy difficult. Video laryngoscopy is an alternative to direct laryngoscopy. The GlideScope video laryngoscope, successfully used in expected and unexpected difficult pediatric airway situations, has not been studied so far in children with cervical spine immobilization. METHODS: A total of 23 children underwent laryngoscopy with manual cervical spine immobilization using the GlideScope and a direct laryngoscope (Miller 1 or Macintosh 2 blade). Percentage of glottis opening score, Cormack-Lehane score, and time to best view were recorded. RESULTS: Percentage of glottis opening score using the GlideScope was 50% (1%-87%) and 90% (60%-100%) using direct laryngoscopy (P < 0.001). Cormack-Lehane score using the GlideScope was 1 (1-2.7) and 1 (1-1) in direct laryngoscopy (P < 0.001). Time to best view with the GlideScope was 21 seconds (12.2-28 seconds) and 7 seconds (6-8.7 seconds) in direct laryngoscopy (P < 0.05). Data are presented as median and interquartile range and analyzed using paired t test. CONCLUSIONS: In simulated difficult pediatric airway, using the GlideScope resulted in a significantly declined view to the glottic entrance. This result is in contrast to studies in children with difficult airway anatomy due to an anterior larynx, where the GlideScope resulted in improved views.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".