MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121278210 · doi:10.1177/1054773808324645

Examining Oral Intake Temperature in Cardiac Surgery Patients

2008· article· en· W2121278210 on OpenAlex
Kathryn M. King, Marlene Donahue, Helen Dowey, Alec Bayes, Laura Cuff, Nichole Korol

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

VenueClinical Nursing Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNausea and vomiting management
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical trialRandomized controlled trialAnesthesiaGastrointestinal functionSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effect of restricting the temperature of cardiac surgery patients' oral intake to room temperature or warmer, over the first 3 postoperative days, on gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms was examined. In all, 57 patients were randomly assigned to receive the intervention or usual care. GI symptoms were measured daily over the first 5 postoperative days. Following hospital discharge, GI symptoms and return to function data were collected over 4 postoperative weeks. On Postoperative Day 1, 41% of patients reported having GI symptoms, and they were significantly associated with higher cross-clamp time. Symptoms dissipated over time. There were no differences between the study groups in GI symptoms or return to function. Nearly 70% of patients who withdrew from the study were randomized to the intervention group. Difficulty associated with adhering to the study protocol was their primary reason for withdrawing. Given these findings, a large-scale clinical trial may not be warranted.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.664

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.333
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.164 · 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