MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2303925251 · doi:10.1097/phm.0000000000000495

Ultrasound Guidance for Technically Challenging Intrathecal Baclofen Pump Refill

2016· article· en· W2303925251 on OpenAlexaff
Mithra B. Maneyapanda, George C. Chang Chien, Ryan Mattie, Prin Amorapanth, Christopher Reger, Zachary L. McCormick

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders
Canadian institutionsGreen Communities Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSpasticityBaclofenIntensive care medicineUltrasoundAnesthesiaSurgeryRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intrathecal baclofen (ITB) therapy is a common treatment used to reduce spasticity due to neurologic disorders and injuries. A variety of factors can increase the difficulty of ITB pump refill. Excess subcutaneous fat overlying the pump, spasticity, suboptimal positioning, pump rotation or inversion, and scar formation over the reservoir fill port can create challenges during pump refill. As a result, multiple unsuccessful attempts at accessing the reservoir fill port can be painful and increase the risk of infection, particularly when repeat skin puncture is required. Blind attempts to refill a pump in challenging cases may also result in subcutaneous injection or pocket fill, resulting in a potentially fatal baclofen withdrawal syndrome. We describe 3 successful ITB pump refills in technically challenging cases when using ultrasound guidance. This represents an innovative approach to using ultrasound guidance to facilitate ITB refill in adults with intractable spasticity. We present these new clinical data with a literature review of potential complications related to inaccurate pump refill procedures and discuss the utility of ultrasound guidance for preventing such adverse events.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.287 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & RehabilitationSame topicBotulinum Toxin and Related Neurological DisordersFrench-language works237,207