MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318063670 · doi:10.1097/aap.0000000000000086

Off Side! A Simple Modification to the Parasagittal In-Plane Approach for Paravertebral Block

2014· article· en· W2318063670 on OpenAlexaff
Faraj W. Abdallah, Richard Brull

Bibliographic record

VenueRegional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTransverse planeProcess (computing)Plane (geometry)Epidural spaceTransducerSimple (philosophy)SurgeryRadiologyAcousticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of thoracic paravertebral blocks (PVBs) for breast cancer surgery confers important analgesic benefits. Several ultrasound (US)-guided PVB approaches have been described, but still elusive is the ideal technique that (1) permits continuous visualization of the entire needle shaft and tip, (2) avoids aiming the needle tip and injectate directly toward the neuraxis, and (3) is easy to perform. Although the parasagittal view in-plane PVB approach satisfies the former 2 criteria, maneuvering the needle to reach the targeted paravertebral space can be difficult as its trajectory is often obstructed by the bony transverse processes. This brief technical report describes the "off-side" technique--a simple solution to the technical challenge posed by the double-fulcrum effect exerted first by the transducer and then by the adjacent inferior transverse process. Our "off-side" technique marks a departure from conventional US-guided regional anesthesia teaching that recommends positioning the target in the middle of the US field and may be useful in similar types of US-guided regional anesthesia procedures such as neuraxial blockade.

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)0.001
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRegional Anesthesia & Pain MedicineSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207