MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610122849 · doi:10.1002/9781119421375.ch27

Physiology, Pathophysiology, and Anesthetic Management of Patients with Respiratory Disease

2015· other· en· W2610122849 on OpenAlexaff
Wayne N. McDonell, Carolyn L. Kerr

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpirationMedicineFunctional residual capacityAnesthesiaTidal volumeVentilation (architecture)Lung volumesRespiratory physiologyRespiratory systemAnestheticRespirationResidual volumeLungSedationAirwayInternal medicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An understanding of respiratory function as it relates to anesthesia requires consideration of the neural control of respiration and its effect on alveolar ventilation (VA); the influence of anesthesia on the airway, chest wall, and lung volumes; and the alterations in ventilation-perfusion (V/Q) relationships during anesthesia. To describe the events of pulmonary ventilation, air in the lung has been subdivided into four different volumes and four different capacities: tidal volume, inspiratory reserve volume (IRV), expiratory reserve volume (ERV), and residual volume (RV). The volume of gas remaining in the lungs at the end of a normal expiration (that is, the functional residual capacity (FRC)) varies considerably as the position of the diaphragm, in particular, changes. Sedation and general anesthesia can produce profound changes in a patient's respiratory function, with the degree of change depending on the drugs employed, the species involved, the depth of anesthesia, the surgical procedure, and the health of the animal.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207