MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2514747749

Impedance Cardiography-Guided Treatment of Hypertension: A Review of the Literature.

2014· review· en· W2514747749 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fadi Khraim, Rodolfo Pike

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpedance cardiographyMedicineBlood pressureContext (archaeology)HemodynamicsVascular resistanceCardiologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineStroke volumeHeart rate
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Hypertension occurs when regulatory mechanisms fail, resulting in increased cardiac output (CO) and/or increased systemic vascular resistance (SVR). Impedance cardiography (ICG) is a non-invasive technology that measures CO and SVR. OBJECTIVE: To assess the literature related to the use of ICG in guiding the selection of anti-hypertensive medications in individuals with hypertension. DESIGN: PubMed and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases were searched for pertinent literature. Only English language, primary research reports published between 1990 and 2014 were included. FINDINGS: The literature demonstrated significant reduction of blood pressure among participants who were treated with ICG-guided selection of anti-hypertensive medications when compared to standard treatment. CONCLUSION: Although the research reviewed is not without limitations (e.g., small sample sizes and small effect sizes), individualized pharmacologic treatment of uncontrolled hypertension based on ICG-obtained hemodynamics seems successful in reducing blood pressure. Further research within the Canadian context that addresses the limitations is warranted.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207