MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fluid Resuscitation in the Canadian Forces

2003· review· en· W2409599095 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ronald Brisebois

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Armed Forces
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresidential systemLoginWorld Wide WebLogo (programming language)Computer scienceRegister (sociolinguistics)Internet privacyComputer securityPolitical sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In general, the Canadian Forces follow widely accepted principles of fluid resuscitation. These are simply guidelines for fluid resuscitation, and the Canadian Forces currently do not have an absolute doctrine that the clinician in the field must follow. In addition, these principles are adapted to our field environment and the tactical situation that may present itself. In general, Advanced Trauma Life Support guidelines are followed not only for fluid resuscitation but also for the overall resuscitation of the patient. Ringer's lactate is the primary resuscitation fluid that is used. Emphasis is placed on attempting to control ongoing hemorrhage specifically either with direct pressure, surgical control, or splinting of long bone or pelvic fractures at the earliest possible stage.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.633
Threshold uncertainty score0.729

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.333 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207