MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070930892 · doi:10.1109/embc.2013.6610760

Real-time cardiorespiratory coherence is blind to changes in respiration during general anesthesia

2013· article· en· W2070930892 on OpenAlexaff
Chris J. Brouse, Guy A. Dumont, Dorothy Myers, Erin Cooke, Jonathan Stinson, Joanne Lim, J. Mark Ansermino

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiorespiratory fitnessRespirationAnesthesiaCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Computer scienceMedicineInternal medicineMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: A novel real-time cardiorespiratory coherence (CRC) algorithm has been developed to monitor nociception during general anesthesia. CRC uses custom designed filters to track and analyze the respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) as it moves in time and frequency. CRC is a form of sensor fusion between heart rate and respiration, estimating the strength of linear coupling between the two signals. The aim of this study was to estimate the effect of changes in respiration rate (RR) and peak airway pressure (PPaw) on CRC. The response of CRC was compared to a prior offline wavelet-based algorithm (WTCRC) as well as traditional univariate heart rate variability (HRV) measures. A nociception index was created for each algorithm, ranging from 0 (no nociception) to 100 (strong nociception). METHODS: Following ethics approval and informed consent, data were collected from 48 children receiving general anesthesia during dental surgery. The times of change in RR and PPaw events were noted in real-time. A total of 43 RR and 35 PPaw change events were analyzed post hoc in pseudo real-time. The nociception index averages were compared between a baseline period and a response period around each event. A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare changes. RESULTS: The change in RR changed the CRC nociception index by an average of -2.2 [95% CI from -10 to 4.7] (P > 0.3), and the change in PPaw changed the CRC nociception index by an average of 5.4 [-1.0 to 11] (P > 0.1). The changes were smaller than those of many traditional HRV measures. CONCLUSIONS: Real-time CRC was blind to the changes in respiration, and was less sensitive than many of the traditional HRV measures. A nociception index based on CRC can thus function across a wider range of respiratory conditions than can many traditional univariate HRV measures. The real-time CRC algorithm shows promise for monitoring nociception during general anesthesia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207