MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112558977 · doi:10.1186/2110-5820-3-35

Hypernatremia in patients with severe traumatic brain injury: a systematic review

2013· review· en· W2112558977 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Intensive Care · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicElectrolyte and hormonal disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
FundersVancouver Coastal Health Research Institute
KeywordsHypernatremiaMedicineTraumatic brain injuryDiabetes insipidusIntensive care medicineRetrospective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)PediatricsCohort studyEmergency medicineInternal medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hypernatremia is common following traumatic brain injury (TBI) and occurs from a variety of mechanisms, including hyperosmotic fluids, limitation of free water, or diabetes insipidus. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the relationship between hypernatremia and mortality in patients with TBI. METHODS: We searched the following databases up to November 2012: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL. Using a combination of MeSH and text terms, we developed search filters for the concepts of hypernatremia and TBI and included studies that met the following criteria: (1) compared hypernatremia to normonatremia, (2) adult patients with TBI, (3) presented adjusted outcomes for mortality or complications. RESULTS: Bibliographic and conference search yielded 1,152 citations and 11 abstracts, respectively. Sixty-five articles were selected for full-text review with 5 being included in our study. All were retrospective cohort studies totaling 5,594 (range 100-4,296) patients. There was marked between-study heterogeneity. The incidence of hypernatremia ranged between 16% and 40%. Use of hyperosmolar therapy was presented in three studies (range 14-85% of patients). Hypernatremia was associated with increased mortality across all four studies that presented this outcome. Only one study considered diabetes insipidus (DI) in their analysis where hypernatremia was associated with increased mortality in patients who did not receive DDAVP. CONCLUSIONS: Although hypernatremia was associated with increased mortality in the included studies, there was marked between-study heterogeneity. DI was a potential confounder in several studies. Considering these limitations, the clinical significance of hypernatremia in TBI is difficult to establish at this stage.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.302 · 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