MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102668864 · doi:10.1177/1089253210376673

Intraoperative Hemodynamic Instability During and After Separation From Cardiopulmonary Bypass

2010· review· en· W2102668864 on OpenAlex
André Denault, Alain Deschamps, Pierre Couture

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiopulmonary bypassCardiac surgeryPopulationIntensive care medicineHeart failureCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every year, more than 1 million patients worldwide undergo cardiac surgery. Because of the aging of the population, cardiac surgery will increasingly be offered to patients at a higher risk of complications. The consequence is a reduced physiological reserve and hence an increased risk of mortality. These issues will have a significant impact on future health care costs because the population undergoing cardiac surgery will be older and more likely to develop postoperative complications. One of the most dreaded complications in cardiac surgery is difficult separation from cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). When separation from CPB is associated with right-ventricular failure, the mortality rate will range from 44% to 86%. Therefore, the diagnosis and the preoperative prediction of difficult separation from CPB will be crucial to improve the selection and care of patients and to prevent complications for this high-risk patient population.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.297 · 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