MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135033947 · doi:10.1109/titb.2002.1006305

Extending ventilation duration estimations approach from adult to neonatal intensive care patients using artificial neural networks

2002· article· en· W2135033947 on OpenAlexaff
Yanling Tong, Monique Frize, R. Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioNortel (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanical ventilationOverfittingNeonatal intensive care unitMedicineArtificial ventilationIntensive care unitIntensive careArtificial neural networkVentilation (architecture)Duration (music)Intensive care medicineEmergency medicinePediatricsComputer scienceAnesthesiaMachine learningInternal medicineEngineeringRespiratory disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In earlier work, the research group successfully used artificial neural networks (ANNs) to estimate ventilation duration for adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The ANNs performed well in terms of correct classification rate (CCR) and average squared error (ASE) classifying the outcome into two classes: whether patients were ventilated for less than/equal to or for more than 8 h (< or >). The objective of new work was to apply this adult model to the estimation of ventilation with neonatal ICU (NICU) patient records. The performance obtained with the neonatal patients was comparable to that previously found with the adult database, again as measured in terms of a maximum CCR and a minimum ASE. The effectiveness of using the weight-elimination technique in controlling overfitting was again validated for the neonatal patients as it had been for our adult patients. It was concluded that the approach developed for ICU adult patients was also successfully applied to a different medical environment: neonatal ICU patients.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information Technology in BiomedicineSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207