MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326732680 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0000000000000272

Ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction

2015· review· en· W2326732680 on OpenAlex
Basil J. Petrof, Sabah N. A. Hussain

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreChristie (Canada)
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineDiaphragm (acoustics)Diaphragmatic breathingMechanical ventilationCritically illIntensive care medicineWeaknessBench to bedsideAtrophyMuscle atrophyInternal medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of the review is to summarize and discuss recent research regarding the role of mechanical ventilation in producing weakness and atrophy of the diaphragm in critically ill patients, an entity termed ventilator-induced diaphragmatic dysfunction (VIDD). RECENT FINDINGS: Severe weakness of the diaphragm is frequent in mechanically ventilated patients, in whom it contributes to poor outcomes including increased mortality. Significant progress has been made in identifying the molecular mechanisms responsible for VIDD in animal models, and there is accumulating evidence for occurrence of the same cellular processes in the diaphragms of human patients undergoing prolonged mechanical ventilation. SUMMARY: Recent research is pointing the way to novel pharmacologic therapies as well as nonpharmacologic methods for preventing VIDD. The next major challenge in the field will be to move these findings from the bench to the bedside in critically ill patients.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.410
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.113 · 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