MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327058836 · doi:10.1097/ta.0b013e318232e7c1

The Use of the Radiographic Appearance of the Azygos Vein to Assess Volume Status in Trauma Patients

2011· article· en· W2327058836 on OpenAlexaff
Neil E. Gibson, Christine Stehman, Rennae Thiessen, Katherine J. Gibson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph's HospitalSturgeon Community HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypovolemiaRadiographyResuscitationHeart rateIntravascular volume statusRadiologyBlood pressurePopulationNuclear medicineCardiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The assessment of hypovolemia in victims of trauma is a critical aspect of resuscitation and care in the initial presentation of a patient. This study attempted to validate the use of the appearance of the azygos vein (AV) on initial chest radiographs as a parameter that may add to this initial assessment. METHODS: The design involved a blinded independent assessment of serial chest radiographs from consecutive trauma cases from January 21, 2008, until September 13, 2008, by a trained Radiologist and a Trauma Team Leader (TTL) and then comparing this assessment to mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate estimates of volume status in serial severe trauma patients. This is an insensitive but specific measure of volume status. RESULTS: In this population with high prevalence of hypovolemia, the presence of an AV ≤ 0.5 cm yielded a sensitivity of 4.9% and 9.8% for the TTL and Radiologist, respectively, in patients with a mean arterial pressure <70 and heart rate >100. The specificity was 98.8% and 91.6%, which translates into a positive likelihood ratio of 4.08 and 1.17 for the TTL and Radiologist, respectively. The Kappa score for agreement between the two readers was 0.4. CONCLUSION: When a small AV can be seen by the TTL, it may be a useful adjunct to the assessment of volume status.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207