The Use of Ultrasound to Improve Practice and Reduce Complication Rates in Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter Insertions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Brief The risk of thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) is a well-known complication. A study was conducted to compare thrombosis rates associated with the old technique of inserting PICCs by visualizing veins in the antecubital fossa, using anatomical landmarks and palpation versus using ultrasound guidance to locate veins in the upper arm. The findings from data collected on 538 patients included a significant decline in the thrombosis rates, as thrombosis decreased from 9.3% with the palpation method to 1.9% with the ultrasound method, and successful PICC placements by registered nurses increased from 76.9% when using the old method to 98.9% when using ultrasound guidance. The risk of thrombosis related to peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) is a well-known complication. A study was conducted to compare thrombosis rates associated with the old technique of inserting PICCs by visualizing veins in the antecubital fossa, using anatomical landmarks and palpation versus using ultrasound guidance to locate veins in the upper arm. The findings from data collected on 538 patients included a significant decline in the thrombosis rates, as thrombosis decreased from 9.3% with the palpation method to 1.9% with the ultrasound method, and successful PICC placements by registered nurses increased from 76.9% when using the old method to 98.9% when using ultrasound guidance.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it