MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070781170 · doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e3181be0e43

The GlideScope Facilitates Nasogastric Tube Insertion: A Randomized Clinical Trial

2009· article· en· W2070781170 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Reza Shariat Moharari, Amir Fallah, Mohammad Reza Khajavi, Patricia Khashayar, Maziar Moradi‐Lakeh, Atabak Najafi

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialIntubationLaryngoscopesTube (container)AnesthesiaSurgeryLaryngoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The GlideScope (Saturn Biomedical Systems, B.C., Canada) is a reusable videolaryngoscope and is considered an effective device for tracheal intubation. We designed this study to evaluate the application of this device in nasogastric tube (NGT) insertion. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial was performed at a teaching hospital on 80 adult patients who required intraoperative placement of an NGT. The patients were divided into 2 groups (the control and the GlideScope group) using computerized, random allocation software. In the control group, the NGT was inserted blindly as commonly performed in operating rooms; however, in the GlideScope group, the tube was inserted with the assistance of a GlideScope. The number of attempts for NGT insertion and the time required for inserting the NGT properly along with the occurrence of possible complications were recorded. RESULTS: The mean intubation time in the GlideScope group was 27.7 +/- 20.7 s shorter than that in the control group. NGT insertion in the first attempt was successful in approximately 85% of the patients in the GlideScope group; in the control group, however, the tubes were inserted successfully after the first attempt in 57.5% of the patients. Complications were reported in 14 patients (35%) of the control group and 8 patients (20%) of the GlideScope group. CONCLUSION: GlideScope facilitates NGT insertion and reduces the duration of the procedure.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations61
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207