MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139066515 · doi:10.1164/rccm.201205-0954so

Intensive Care Unit–acquired Weakness

2012· review· en· W2139066515 on OpenAlexafffund
Jane Batt, Claúdia C. dos Santos, Jill I. Cameron, Margaret S. Herridge

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care unitWeaknessIntensive care medicineIntensive careSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICUAW) begins within hours of mechanical ventilation and may not be completely reversible over time. It represents a major functional morbidity of critical illness and is an important patient-centered outcome with clear implications for quality of life and resumption of prior work and lifestyle. There is heterogeneity in functional outcome related to ICUAW across various patient populations after an episode of critical illness. This state-of-the art review argues that this observed heterogeneity may represent a clinical spectrum of disability in which there are recognizable clinical phenotypes for outcome according to age, burden of comorbid illness, and ICU length of stay. It further argues that these functional outcomes are modified by mood, cognition, and caregiver physical and mental health. This proposed construct of clinical phenotypes will be used as a framework for a review of the current literature on the molecular biology of muscle and nerve injury. This translational approach for the development of models pairing clinical phenotypes for different functional outcomes after critical illness with molecular mechanism of injury may offer unique insights into the diagnosis and treatment of muscle and nerve lesions.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations256
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207