MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067870553 · doi:10.1002/ppul.20767

Review of optimal characteristics of face‐masks for valved‐holding chambers (VHCs)

2008· review· en· W2067870553 on OpenAlexaff
Israel Amirav, Michael T. Newhouse

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Pulmonology · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMouthpieceMedicineInhalerFace masksMascaraIntensive care medicineBiomedical engineeringSurgeryDentistryAsthma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inhaled drugs are frequently given to infants and young children with a pressurized metered-dose inhaler (pMDI) attached to a valved-holding chamber (VHC) with face mask. In young children and infants who cannot breathe through a mouthpiece, the face mask serves as the interface between the patient and the VHC. Although the mask interface is one of the most important factors determining the dose of medication delivered from the VHC to the nose and mouth in these patients, its optimal characteristics are not well known. Recent studies clearly identify several face mask factors that determine the success or failure of drug delivery with these devices. This review summarizes the most important features of an optimal mask design such as: face seal/leak, volume of dead space, contour, flexibility, transparency, weight and cost. By optimizing these characteristics it should be possible to improve mask design. This will maximize the magnitude and reduce the variability of the dose presented to the respiratory tract while making the mask more comfortable and patient/caregiver-friendly.

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)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations48
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric PulmonologySame topicInhalation and Respiratory Drug DeliveryFrench-language works237,207