MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132505449 · doi:10.1093/ejcts/ezt186

Is it better to shine a light, or rather to curse the darkness? Cerebral near-infrared spectroscopy and cardiac surgery

2013· editorial· en· W2132505449 on OpenAlexaff
John M. Murkin

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery · 2013
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDarknessCurseMedicinePsychologyOpticsPhysicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebral perfusion and good neurological outcome appear most obviously at risk during operations on the aortic arch. However, it is also evident that from a numerical standpoint, otherwise uncomplicated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) accounts for the greatest number of perioperative strokes, as shown in a review of 7839 patients in which it was determined that the overall incidence of clinical stroke immediately apparent at extubation was 1.4% and that in addition to severe aortic calcification, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time was also an independent risk factor [1]. Similarly, in a previous study of 13 897 CABG patients, it was also noted that the duration of CPB increased the risk of hypoperfusion strokes and that ‘nearly 75% of all strokes occurred among the 90% of patients at low or medium preoperative risk’ [2]. These facts indicate that the duration of CPB and inadvertent cerebral hypoperfusion can directly influence the risk of perioperative stroke and adverse neurological outcomes. Clearly, for most patients undergoing cardiac surgery, survivorship is of first importance, but it is also readily apparent that for many patients, the risk of severe neurological injury, stroke and significant cognitive impairment are ever-present and particularly feared concerns [3].

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 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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations21
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic SurgerySame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207