MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768340362 · doi:10.1186/s40560-017-0262-8

Monitoring diaphragm function in a patient with myasthenia gravis: electrical activity of the diaphragm vs. maximal inspiratory pressure

2017· article· en· W2768340362 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intensive Care · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyasthenia Gravis and Thymoma
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTidal volumeDiaphragm (acoustics)MedicineMyasthenia gravisMechanical ventilationWeaningVentilation (architecture)WeaknessAnesthesiaRespiratory minute volumePressure support ventilationVentilator weaningRespiratory systemRespiratory rateMechanical ventilatorMuscle weaknessInternal medicineSurgeryBlood pressureHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Maximal inspiratory pressure (MIP) is used to assess respiratory muscle strength of patients with myasthenia gravis (MG) requiring ventilatory support. Electrical activity of the diaphragm (E-di) has been used to guide weaning. CASE PRESENTATION: The MIP and tidal volume/ΔE-di (the patient-to-ventilator breath contribution) were monitored in a 12-year-old girl with MG requiring ventilator support. The same ventilatory settings were maintained until extubation. During weaning, MIP increased slightly, but varied unpredictably. Tidal volume/ΔE-di decreased at a constant rate as muscle strength recovered. CONCLUSION: In this patient with muscle weakness, E-di was a reliable tool to monitor weaning from mechanical ventilation.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.434

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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