MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inspiratory resistance maintains arterial pressure during central hypovolemia: Implications for treatment of patients with severe hemorrhage

2007· article· en· W2127426391 on OpenAlex
Víctor A. Convertino, Kathy L. Ryan, Caroline A. Rickards, William H. Cooke, Ahamed H. Idris, Anja Metzger, John B. Holcomb, Bruce D. Adams, Keith G. Lurie

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

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsWildlife Habitat Canada (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypovolemiaBlood pressureAnesthesiaCardiologyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that an impedance threshold device would increase systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial blood pressure and delay the onset of symptoms and cardiovascular collapse associated with severe central hypovolemia. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, blinded trial design. SETTING: Human physiology laboratory. PATIENTS: Nine healthy nonsmoking normotensive subjects (five males, four females). INTERVENTIONS: Central hypovolemia and impending cardiovascular collapse were induced in human volunteers by applying progressive lower body negative pressure (under two experimental conditions: a) while breathing with an impedance threshold device set to open at -7 cm H2O pressure (active impedance threshold device); and b) breathing through a sham impedance threshold device (control). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Systolic blood pressure (79 +/- 5 mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure (57 +/- 3 mm Hg), and mean arterial pressure (65 +/- 4 mm Hg) were lower (p < .02) when subjects (n = 9) breathed through the sham impedance threshold device than when they breathed through the active impedance threshold device at the same time of cardiovascular collapse during sham breathing (102 +/- 3, 77 +/- 3, 87 +/- 3 mm Hg, respectively). Elevated blood pressure was associated with 23% greater lower body negative pressure tolerance using an active impedance threshold device (1639 +/- 220 mm Hg-min) compared with a sham impedance threshold device (1328 +/- 144 mm Hg-min) (p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an impedance threshold device increased systemic blood pressure and delayed the onset of cardiovascular collapse during severe hypovolemic hypotension in spontaneously breathing human volunteers. This device may provide rapid noninvasive hemodynamic support in patients with hypovolemic hypotension once the blood loss has been controlled but before other definitive therapies are available.

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)0.000
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.283 · 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