Monitoring Severity of Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome: New and Progressive Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome, Scoring Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the diagnostic criteria of new and progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and scoring systems that might be used to assess and monitor the severity and progression of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome in children presented as part of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development MODS Workshop (March 26-27, 2015). DATA SOURCES: Literature review, research data, and expert opinion. STUDY SELECTION: Not applicable. DATA EXTRACTION: Moderated by an experienced expert from the field, issues relevant to the monitoring of the severity of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome including new and progressive multiple organ dysfunction syndrome and scoring systems were presented, discussed, and debated with a focus on identifying knowledge gaps and research priorities. DATA SYNTHESIS: Summary of presentations and discussion supported and supplemented by relevant literature. CONCLUSIONS: Many sets of diagnostic criteria of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome are presently available. All are useful, but their diagnostic and predictive value can be improved. Several types of diagnostic criteria are candidates to describe the severity and to monitor the progression of cases of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, which include existing scores of organ dysfunction: Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction, version 2, daily Pediatric Logistic Organ Dysfunction, version 2, organ failure-free days, etc. If a new set of diagnostic criteria of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome is created, its value must be validated. Furthermore, the epidemiology of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome based on these new diagnostic criteria must be compared with the epidemiology found with the preexisting sets of diagnostic criteria. The reliability as well as the added values of additional or new candidate markers of organ dysfunction and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome severity must be studied and compared.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".