MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exponential Sum Modeling of Reswick and Rogers Pressure-Duration Curve: A New Analysis and Model

2012· article· en· W2316138606 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Óscar Linares, Darko Stefanovski, Raymond C. Boston

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAkaike information criterionExponential functionMathematicsCompartment (ship)StatisticsExponential growthApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reswick and Rogers model is not valid for predicting the effects of short- and long-time tissue exposures to contact pressures because it lacks intercepts. A different model, without those asymptotic properties, that could fit the shape of the curve well, could potentially provide useful information. We used modeling to test the hypotheses that an exponential model could fit Reswick and Rogers pressure-duration curve, and, if so, to determine the order of the best fit exponential model. Up to four exponential sum models were fit. Three exponentials provided the best fit [Weighted sum-of-squared residuals 72, Akaike Information Criterion 89, r=0.997]. Thereby identifying three homogeneously distinct anatomical pressure-load containing tissue compartments: skin, fat, and muscle. A fourth compartment, bone, could not be identified because of limited resolution of the data. Our results suggest that the fat pressure-load containing compartment may play an adaptive compensatory preventive role in response to pressure loads—“a cushion effect.” Exponential sum modeling of pressure-duration curves provides a new approach for studying the dynamics of compression in normal and disease states in humans, and it may be useful for practical application at the point-of-care to assist with prevention and treatment of pressure ulcers.

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)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.310 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Basic & Applied SciencesSame topicPressure Ulcer Prevention and ManagementFrench-language works237,207