MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044814965 · doi:10.1258/ult.2011.010048

My Patient Has No Blood Pressure: Have They Got an Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm? Point-Of-Care Ultrasound of the Abdominal Aorta in Hypotensive Patients

2011· article· en· W2044814965 on OpenAlexaff
Audra Gedmintas, Matthew Grabove, Paul Atkinson

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic aneurysm repair treatments
Canadian institutionsSaint John Regional HospitalDalhousie University
FundersCollege of Emergency Medicine
KeywordsMedicinePalpationPulsatile flowAbdominal aortic aneurysmEmergency departmentAbdominal aortaPresentation (obstetrics)Blood pressurePoint of care ultrasoundSurgeryAortic aneurysmRadiologyAneurysmAortaUltrasoundCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with undifferentiated hypotension, how can point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) help identify abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) as the cause of the hypotension? Many hypotensive patients in the ED are critically ill, with only minutes available to find the cause of the hypotension and treat it before the patient decompensates. While the classic description of the presentation of a ruptured AAA is of collapse with sudden onset abdominal pain and a palpable, pulsatile abdominal mass, detection of AAA by palpation is notoriously unreliable, and many patients are unaware of their underlying condition. This life-threatening situation is made even more difficult by virtue of the fact that the patient is often too unstable to travel for traditional diagnostics such as computed tomography. This article will address the use of PoCUS for the detection of AAA in the evaluation of the hypotensive patient.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasoundSame topicAortic aneurysm repair treatmentsFrench-language works237,207