MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2463802265 · doi:10.1177/1078155216656928

Baxter elastomeric pumps: Feasibility of weight estimates

2016· article· en· W2463802265 on OpenAlexaff
Carole Chambers, Mica Pabia, Michael B. Sawyer, Patricia A. Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChemotherapy-related skin toxicity
Canadian institutionsAlberta InnovatesAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePharmacyInfusion pumpAnesthesiaNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Elastomeric pumps are used to infuse a 46-h fluorouracil protocol and patients are asked to visually inspect the pump daily. The pump has a variability of ±10% and there are additional patient variables that can increase this. The feasibility of weighing the pump rather than a visual inspection along with the secondary objective to confirm the pump's variability in real world conditions was undertaken. Methods Empty pumps were weighed using both pharmacy and kitchen scales. Pumps upon completion of the 46-h infusion were also weighed using both pharmacy and kitchen scales. Results The kitchen scale was as accurate as the pharmacy grade scale. Disconnected pumps showed the expected variability from using these infusor pumps along with a few showing greater variability likely due to patient variables. Conclusion Weighing pumps appears to be feasible both at the pharmacy and home level. Next steps would be to weigh pumps during the infusion to validate an alternate method to simple visual inspection for patients to confirm proper infusing of the pump at their home.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.378 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Oncology Pharmacy PracticeSame topicChemotherapy-related skin toxicityFrench-language works237,207