Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1892 Osler described 'rapid loss of flesh' in prolonged sepsis. Thereafter, for years, limb weakness was attributed to cachectic myopathy, and difficulty weaning from mechanical ventilation was attributed to diaphragmatic fatigue. In 1961 Mertens described 'coma-polyneuropathies', and in 1971 Henderson and colleagues described polyneuropathy in patients with burns. In 1984 Bolton and colleagues, in a series of reports, defined the clinical, electrophysiological and morphological features of septic encephalopathy and critical illness polyneuropathy. Evidence suggested that polyneuropathy was due to the 'toxic' effects of sepsis. Polyneuropathy was a common cause of difficulty in weaning when lung and cardiac cause had been excluded. Since 1984, cases of critical illness polyneuropathy have been reported from several countries. Moreover, a number of investigators reported instances of critical illness myopathy. Comprehensive studies by Latronico and colleagues indicated that polyneuropathy and myopathy often occurred together in the same patient. With successful treatment of sepsis, improvement often occurred in encephalopathy, polyneuropathy and myopathy, except in very severe cases.
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 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 | 0.011 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".