MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Omission of Nitrous Oxide from a Propofol-based Anesthetic Does Not Affect the Recovery of Women Undergoing Outpatient Gynecologic Surgery

2000· article· en· W2145668688 on OpenAlexafffund
Ramiro Arellano, Meena Pole, S. Rafuse, Mary A Fletcher, Y. Saad, Mark Friedlander, Andrew Norris, Frances Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsNorth York General HospitalToronto Western HospitalUniversity Health Network
FundersWomen's College Hospital
KeywordsMedicinePropofolAnesthesiaAmbulatoryFentanylAdverse effectNauseaAnestheticIncidence (geometry)AntiemeticPostoperative nausea and vomitingOutpatient surgerySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although nitrous oxide (N2O) is used commonly during anesthesia, clinically relevant advantages-disadvantages of using this agent are not well established in the ambulatory setting. This study in women undergoing ambulatory gynecologic surgery compares outcomes in patients administered total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus the propofol plus N2O. The primary outcome was the time to home readiness. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of postanesthetic adverse events. METHODS: Women presenting for elective ambulatory termination of pregnancy or gynecologic laparoscopy were induced with an intravenous sleep dose of propofol and fentanyl. After induction, subjects were randomly allocated to maintenance anesthesia with propofol alone or propofol plus 65% N2O. Patients were assessed by a blinded observer in the postanesthetic care unit at 20-min intervals to determine home readiness. Postoperative pain and nausea were measured with visual analog scales. Postoperative analgesics and antiemetics were recorded. The incidence of adverse events occurring after hospital discharge was assessed by a telephone interview 24 h postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 740 patients received propofol alone, and 750 patients received propofol plus N2O. Mean home readiness times were not significantly different between treatment groups. There were no significant differences between groups in pain scores, nausea scores, analgesia administration, or antiemetic administration before discharge. There were no significant differences in the frequency of adverse events for 24 h after discharge from hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Omission of N2O from a propofol-based anesthetic for ambulatory gynecologic surgery does not affect time to home readiness or the incidence of postoperative adverse events up to 24 h after discharge from hospital. (Key words: Awareness; outpatient surgery; total intravenous anesthesia.)

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)0.001
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.701

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations79
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207