MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335168568 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0000000000000170

Extracorporeal life support for severe acute respiratory distress syndrome

2015· review· en· W2335168568 on OpenAlexaff
Aleksandra Leligdowicz, Eddy Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineARDSExtracorporeal membrane oxygenationIntensive care medicineAcute respiratory distressRandomized controlled trialQuality of life (healthcare)ExtracorporealClinical trialLife supportLungSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide a summary of the recent literature on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) in adults with severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), focusing on advances in equipment, current conventional and unconventional indications, complications, and future applications. RECENT FINDINGS: ECMO use has increased during the past 5 years. Advances in cannulation, circuit design, and patient selection have made it a safer therapeutic option in severe ARDS, and its use has become more widespread for nonconventional indications. SUMMARY: High-quality evidence for the routine use of ECMO for management of adult patients with severe ARDS is still lacking. An ongoing randomized controlled trial (ECMO to rescue lung injury in severe ARDS) will contribute valuable data to guide clinical decisions to opt for this supportive therapy.

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)0.000
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 score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.263
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.190 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in Critical CareSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207