MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hypoxic status and its prognosis in patients with head injury

2015· article· en· W2167660421 on OpenAlexaff
S Ankita, Rahul Kunkulol, Meena Hussain Shaikh, Ameya R. Sangle

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Medical Research & Health Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsPontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHead injuryHead (geology)SurgeryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study was undertaken to investigate the effect of decreased oxygenation status in a patient of head injury and its outcome in terms of prognosis of patients with regards to neurological damage. The objective was to find out a co-relation between the Sp02 levels in a patient on admission and the severity of head injury. Prospective observational study was carried out after the approval of Institutional ethical committee. Patient with head injury coming to the emergency department of Pravara Rural hospital were assessed for the severity using Glasgow Coma scale (GCS) and hypoxic status by using pulse oximeter with bedside monitors. The Sp02 levels were monitored at 2hrs, 4hrs, 81m, 24hrs and 48hrs by pulse oximeter. At the time of discharge outcome was assessed again by Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) and the treatment that followed it. Oxygenation status of patient on admission affects the prognosis of the patient in terms of residual neurological deficit as assessed by the Glasgow Outcome scale. There is significant co-relation between the Oxygen saturation at the time of admission and the outcome at the time of discharge. Therefore the Sp02 values are significant in patients with head injury as a prognostic factor.

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)0.002
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Medical Research & Health SciencesSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207