MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using near-infrared spectroscopy to measure cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen under multiple levels of arterial oxygenation in piglets

2010· article· en· W2129559015 on OpenAlexafffund
Kenneth M. Tichauer, Jonathan T. Elliott, Jennifer Hadway, David Lee, Ting‐Yim Lee, Keith St. Lawrence

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physiology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOxygenationBolus (digestion)MedicineAnesthesiaCerebral blood flowVenous bloodDeoxygenated HemoglobinOxygenOcclusionSuperior sagittal sinusCardiologyArterial bloodNuclear medicineInternal medicineChemistryHemoglobin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improving neurological care of neonates has been impeded by the absence of suitable techniques for measuring cerebral hemodynamics and energy metabolism at the bedside. Currently, near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) appears to be the technology best suited to fill this gap, and techniques have been proposed to measure both cerebral blood flow (CBF) and cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO2). We have developed a fast and reliable bolus-tracking method of determining CMRO2 that combines measurements of CBF and cerebral venous oxygenation [venous oxygen saturation (CSvO2)]. However, this method has never been validated at different levels of arterial oxygenation [arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2)], which can be highly variable in the clinical setting. In this study, NIRS measurements of CBF, CSvO2, and CMRO2 were obtained over a range of SaO2 in newborn piglets (n=12); CSvO2 values measured directly from sagittal sinus blood samples were collected for validation. Two alternative NIRS methods that measure CSvO2 by manipulating venous oxygenation (i.e., head tilt and partial venous occlusion methods) were also employed for comparison. Statistically significant correlations were found between each NIRS technique and sagittal sinus blood oxygenation (P<0.05). Correlation slopes were 1.03 (r=0.91), 0.73 (r=0.73), and 0.73 (r=0.81) for the bolus-tracking, head tilt, and partial venous occlusion methods, respectively. The bolus-tracking technique displayed the best correlation under hyperoxic (SaO2=99.9±0.03%) and normoxic (SaO2=86.9±6.6%) conditions and was comparable to the other techniques under hypoxic conditions (SaO2=40.7±9.9%). The reduced precision of the bolus-tracking method under hypoxia was attributed to errors in CSvO2 measurement that were magnified at low SaO2 levels. In conclusion, the bolus-tracking technique of measuring CSvO2, and therefore CMRO2, is accurate and robust for an SaO2>50% but provides reduced accuracy under more severe hypoxic levels.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations25
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysiologySame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207