MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149059334 · doi:10.1111/anae.13167

Accuracy of conventional digital palpation and ultrasound of the cricothyroid membrane in obese women in labour

2015· article· en· W2149059334 on OpenAlexaff
Kong Eric You-Ten, D. Desai, Tetyana Postonogova, Naveed Siddiqui

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePalpationUltrasoundUltrasonographyCricoid cartilageThyroid cartilageSurgeryRadiologyLarynx

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Success of cricothyroidotomy depends on accurate identification of anatomical neck landmarks. Anaesthetists palpated the cricothyroid membrane of 28 obese and 28 non-obese women in labour (cut-off BMI 30 kg.m(-2) ) and marked the entry point for device insertion with an ultraviolet invisible pen. Ultrasonography was used to mark the midpoint of the cricothyroid membrane and the distance between the two marks was measured. The median (IQR [range]) distance between the two marks was significantly greater in the obese than the non-obese patients (5 (2-9.5 [0-34]) mm vs 1.8 (0.1-6 [0-15]) mm, respectively; p = 0.02). The cricothyroid membrane was accurately identified with digital palpation in only 39% (11/28) of obese compared with 71% (20/28) of non-obese patients (p = 0.03). Increased neck circumference in obese patients was significantly associated with inaccuracy in locating the cricothyroid membrane. Percutaneous identification of the cricothyroid membrane in obese women in labour was poor. Pre-procedural ultrasound may help improved the identification of neck landmarks for cricothyroidotomy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.259
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations107
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnaesthesiaSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207