MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of hetastarch and mannitol on prolonging survival in stable hypothermia in rats

2000· article· en· W2183753430 on OpenAlexaff
Tze-Fun Lee, J. Westly, Lawrence Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypothermiaHetastarchHematocritMedicineMicrocirculationAnesthesiaSalineMannitolHydroxyethyl starchInternal medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In rats, prolonged stable hypothermia ( approximately 24 h at body temperature of 19 degrees C) is characterized by a time-dependent increase in hematocrit, plasma osmolality, and red blood cell fragility and a decrease in plasma volume. These changes impede tissue microcirculation and could limit survival. As a countermeasure, we used plasma volume expanders of both long (hetastarch)- and short-lasting (mannitol) characteristics to improve microcirculation and hopefully hypothermia survival. Infusion of 6% hetastarch at hour 3 in hypothermia significantly (P < 0.05) enhanced survival over saline control (33.5 vs. 23.8 h); a significant delay in the increases of hematocrit and cell fragility was also observed compared with those in saline controls. Treating the animal with 6% hetastarch at hour 20 during hypothermia caused a similar but less-effective improvement in survival. In contrast, treating the rats with 6% mannitol at hour 3 or 20 during hypothermia failed to enhance survival over saline control, although transient improvement in plasma volume was observed. Our results indicate that by using a long-lasting volume expander, which tends to better maintain plasma volume and rheological parameters governing microcirculation than does saline or a short-lasting volume expander, hypothermia survival can be significantly improved.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologySame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207