MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127284982 · doi:10.4097/kjae.2010.58.5.440

The effect of ketamine on the incidence of emergence agitation in children undergoing tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy under sevoflurane general anesthesia

2010· article· en· W2127284982 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yoon Sook Lee, Woon Young Kim, Jae Ho Choi, Joo Hyung Son, Jae Hwan Kim, Young Cheol Park

Bibliographic record

VenueKorean journal of anesthesiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKetaminePacuAnesthesiaTonsillectomyAdenoidectomyEmergence deliriumNauseaVomitingIncidence (geometry)SevofluranePain scalePostoperative nausea and vomitingSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The rapid emergence and recovery from general anesthesia afforded by sevoflurane is associated with a high incidence of emergence agitation in children. Small doses of ketamine reduce the incidence of emergence agitation. This study compared the effects of ketamine 0.25 mg/kg and 0.5 mg/kg on emergence agitation and postoperative pain. METHODS: The effects of added intravenous ketamine were evaluated in 93 children, ASA I-II, 2-14 years old, undergoing an adenotonsillectomy. The patients were allocated randomly to one of three groups receiving saline (group C), ketamine 0.25 mg/kg (group K0.25) or ketamine 0.5 mg/kg (group K0.5). The children in each group were administered the study drugs 10 minutes before the end of surgery. The recovery characteristics, including the time to extubation, delivery time from the PACU, postoperative nausea and vomiting, agitation and pain were assessed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the extubation time, delivery time and postoperative nausea and vomiting between the three groups. There were significant differences in modified CHEOPS (Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale) between the three groups. The incidence of emergence agitation was low in the K0.25 and K0.5 groups compared to the control group. However, there was no significant difference between the K0.25 and K0.5 groups. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the incidence of emergence agitation between K0.25 and K0.5 groups. However, K0.5 group showed a lower pain score than K0.25 group.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations60
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKorean journal of anesthesiologySame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207