MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111142618 · doi:10.1177/0267659107078142

Lessons learned on the path to a healthier brain: dispelling the myths and challenging the hypotheses

2007· review· en· W2111142618 on OpenAlex
Fraser D. Rubens, Howard Nathan

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

VenuePerfusion · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMythologyIntensive care medicineGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurologic dysfunction remains the most significant complication associated with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). The insidious change of cognitive decline has been perceived as a key factor that has contributed to the shift to percutaneous intervention for coronary disease. Current neuropsychologic testing provides the most sensitive means of demonstrating clinically relevant cerebral damage of this nature. Through extensive experience in randomized clinical trials of over 900 patients undergoing CPB, our team has addressed several key hypotheses related to the embolic/ischemic nature of cerebral injury in cardiac surgery, using this testing. In the first temperature study, patients randomized to hypothermia with passive re-warming had a lower incidence of neurocognitive deficit when compared with those patients who were actively re-warmed to 37 degrees. In order to clarify the role of the hypothermia as opposed to the re-warming process, a second temperature study was completed. In the hypothermic group, patients were cooled and maintained at 34 degrees with no active re-warming whereas, in the normothermic group, the patients were kept at 37 degrees throughout the perioperative period. No difference in neurocognitive outcome in the two groups was seen, implying that the benefit seen in the first temperature study was related not to the hypothermia, but rather to the absence of active re-warming. In the cardiotomy study, patients were randomized to either a control group in which their cardiotomy blood was returned unprocessed, or a treatment group in which this blood was sequestered and processed with centrifugal washing and fat filtration. No significant difference in neurocognitive outcome was found in these two groups. On the other hand, there was a significant increase in bleeding and transfusion requirements in the treatment group. Many of our daily practices in CPB management are based upon assumptions from observational studies without sound reference to evidence-based medicine. Our recent studies have challenged our assumptions related to ischemia and embolic events during CPB. They have also confirmed that, when high standards in trial design are applied, the results can have universal implications in terms of our practice.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.212 · 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