MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551611056 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v7n4p6

The ABCs of managing increased intracranial pressure

2016· article· en· W2551611056 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mohamed Toufic El Hussein, Stephanie Zettel, Ashley M. Suykens

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntracranial pressureRaised intracranial pressureMedicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased intracranial pressure is a complex condition that could pose challenges to the novice practitioner. The authors of this manuscript established a mean of explaining how to care for a patient with elevated intracranial pressure in the form of a mnemonic. The alphabetical mnemonic is based on the key points of interest that address important aspects for caring for a patient with increased intracranial pressure. This paper highlights an innovative approach of piecing together the mosaic of intracranial pressure for students and novice practitioners. The alphabetical mnemonic is further summarized in a table outlining the assessment of the patient, the nursing strategy, and when action is required. The mnemonic presented allows the practitioner or student to readily remember and recognize how to care for a patient with increased intracranial pressure.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0050.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207