MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Lumbar Neuraxial Ultrasound for Spinal and Epidural Anesthesia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2016· review· en· W2510712282 on OpenAlexaff
Anahi Perlas, Lina Paola Alfonso Chaparro, Ki Jinn Chin

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Anesthesia Digest · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLumbarUltrasoundAnesthesiaRegional anesthesiaSurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016;41(2):251–260) Using an ultrasound to examine a patient’s spine prior to the administration of spinal or epidural anesthesia is a new development in regional anesthesia. Such an examination allows anesthesiologists to observe the underlying anatomy and helps improve the accuracy of needle placement. Previous reports have described spinal and epidural techniques that use ultrasound for real-time guidance, which is distinct from this ultrasound-assisted approach. This review assessed the evidence in favor of preprocedural neuraxial ultrasound as a supplementary procedure to lumbar spinal and epidural anesthesia in adults.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.014
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations35
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric Anesthesia DigestSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207