Oxygen therapeutics (blood substitutes) in cardiac surgery
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Discuss and summarize recent published literature related to the use of 'blood substitutes' in cardiac surgery patients. RECENT FINDINGS: Concerns about safety, inventory and the cost of allogenic blood transfusion have led to the continued interest to find an ideal oxygen carrier 'blood substitute' for cardiac surgery patients. Two classes of oxygen therapeutics 'blood substitutes' are being investigated: (1) perfluorocarbons are synthetic fluorinated hydrocarbons which increase dissolved oxygen in the fluid phase and (2) hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers, modified to improve oxygen dissociation properties and side effects profiles of free hemoglobin. Hemoglobin-based oxygen carriers from bovine and human sources are being tested in phase III trials in cardiac surgery patients as well as a variety of other surgical and nonsurgical settings. Recombinant human hemoglobin and encapsulated hemoglobins of any source are emerging. Safety and cost effectiveness are being evaluated for their use as an alternative to blood transfusion or along with other strategies of blood conservation in cardiac surgery. SUMMARY: One hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier (Hemopure) has been approved for use in humans in South Africa as well as another hemoglobin-based oxygen carrier (Gelenpol) and a perfluorocarbon (Perfluoron) in Russia. Phase III trials in Europe and North America will be concluded very soon. We anticipate seeing one or two products approved in North America and Europe by the year 2003/2004.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it