MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2042915075 · doi:10.1097/yct.0b013e31825927a2

Canadian Survey of Perianesthetic Care for Patients Receiving Electroconvulsive Therapy

2012· article· en· W2042915075 on OpenAlex
Ian Gilron, Nicholas J. Delva, Peter Graf, Peter Chan, Murray W. Enns, Caroline Gosselin, Mark Jewell, James Stuart Lawson, B.A. Martin, Roumen Milev, Simon Patry

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ect · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectroconvulsive Therapy Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaAlberta Health ServicesQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectroconvulsive therapyMedicineMEDLINEPsychiatryPsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Political science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: We report on the anesthesia subsection of a comprehensive nationwide survey (Canadian Electroconvulsive Therapy Survey/Enquête canadienne sur les electrochocs) on the practice of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in Canada. METHODS: This comprehensive survey was sent to the 175 Canadian institutions identified as providers of ECT in 2007. Among other topics, 9 anesthesia-related questions were administered regarding anesthesiology consultation; high-risk patients; credentials of the anesthesia provider; monitoring, airway, and resuscitation equipment; anesthetic induction, muscle relaxant, vasoactive, and other perianesthetic drugs and practices; and postanesthetic discharge. RESULTS: Sixty-one percent (107/175) of the institutions returned completed survey questionnaires. More than 70% of the sites reported pre-ECT anesthesiology consultation for all (61%) or most (11%) patients. In more than 90%, a Canadian Royal College-certified anesthesiologist, or equivalent, provided anesthetic care. Routine use of oximetry, electrocardiography, and blood pressure monitoring were reported by all but 2 sites; use of bite block was reported by all but 4 sites; and preoxygenation was reported by all but 7 sites. Dantrolene and capnography were not reported as readily available by 35% and 40%, respectively, with comparatively less frequent availability at non-operating room and lower-volume sites. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest safe practices of anesthesia for ECT in Canada. Further attention needs to be paid to ready availability of dantrolene and capnography, particularly at non-operating room ECT sites. Improvements in anesthetic care of patients undergoing ECT may be realized through continued knowledge translation efforts and by expanding access to currently unavailable anesthetic induction agents and, in some settings, limited clinical anesthesiology resources.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.272 · 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