MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041467858 · doi:10.1097/nan.0b013e3181c65cc9

Needleless Connectors

2010· article· en· W2041467858 on OpenAlexaff
Lynn Hadaway, D Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Infusion Nursing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Sutures and Adhesives
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nurses Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMedicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief Within the past 20 years there has been an explosion of devices designed to allow connection of multiple intravenous sets and catheter hubs without the use of needles. Currently, the number of devices, their internal and external designs, and their functions can be quite confusing. There is a lack of clear definitions and terminology universally accepted by all professionals involved, leading to additional confusion. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the many types of technological designs, clarify the characteristics, and recommend clear and concise definitions. Within the past 20 years there has been an explosion of devices designed to allow connection of multiple intravenous sets and catheter hubs without the use of needles. Currently, the number of devices, their internal and external designs, and their functions can be quite confusing. There is a lack of clear definitions and terminology universally accepted by all professionals involved, leading to additional confusion. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the many types of technological designs, clarify the characteristics, and recommend clear and concise definitions.

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)0.012
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.031

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations42
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Infusion NursingSame topicSurgical Sutures and AdhesivesFrench-language works237,207