MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Prospective Observational Comparison Between Arm and Wrist Blood Pressure During Scheduled Cesarean Delivery

2016· article· en· W2508170746 on OpenAlexaff
Ilana Sebbag, Simon Massey, Arianne Albert, Alison Dube, V. Gunka, M. Joanne Douglas

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Anesthesia Digest · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWristObservational studyForearmBlood pressureShiveringProspective cohort studyPopulationAnesthesiaPhysical therapySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

( Anesth Analg . 2015;121:767–775) Monitoring of both absolute values and clinically significant changes in patient blood pressure (BP) during cesarean delivery (CD) is important for patient welfare. A 20% increase or decrease in BP from baseline normally triggers treatment intervention. Common practice is to take the BP measurement from the upper arm. However, shivering or arm movement during delivery can lead to BP inaccuracies. Studies have shown leg measurements to be ineffective at detecting changes in BP in this patient population, and the forearm/wrist area has been suggested as an alternative as it has less muscle mass and is less prone to movement. In this single-center, prospective, observational study, authors compared upper arm measurements to wrist BP measurements in 49 nonobese pregnant women (older than 19 y) undergoing elective CD under spinal or combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. They hypothesized that change in wrist systolic BP (sBP) would trend with change measured at the same time in the upper arm, with an absolute difference between methods of <±10%.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric Anesthesia DigestSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207