MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188843095 · doi:10.5206/uwomj.v83is1.4398

Anesthetic Management of Septic Shock

2015· article· en· W2188843095 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Konstantinos Alexopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Western Ontario Medical Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeptic shockAnestheticAnesthesiaMedicineShock (circulatory)SurgerySepsisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

background Severe sepsis, a systemic inflammatory response characterized by acute organ dysfunction in the face of an infectious process, is a major healthcare issue worldwide. Sepsis presents a unique challenge in the management of patients who require anesthesia and definitive surgical treatment. Anesthesiologists are involved in the multidisciplinary management of patients with severe sepsis throughout the patient’s clinical course. 1 The mainstays of management include prompt administration of IV antibiotics in conjunction with preoperative fluid and pharmacological resuscitation. The goal is to optimize end organ perfusion through the judicious use of pressors, inotropes and IV fluids. 2 An example might include a patient with an acute small bowel obstruction complicated by sepsis. The patient would be appropriately resuscitated using a multi-modal approach as outlined above, while definitive management would include surgical decompression of the obstruction. Intra-operatively, these patients require conscientious induction of anesthesia, ample fluid resuscitation coupled with invasive hemodynamic/biochemical monitoring. 1 Efforts to promote a favourable surgical outcome of a septic patient begins before the surgeon picks up the scalpel.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Western Ontario Medical JournalSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207