MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791129212 · doi:10.1097/ccm.0000000000003122

Intra-Abdominal Hypertension Is More Common Than Previously Thought: A Prospective Study in a Mixed Medical-Surgical ICU

2018· article· en· W2791129212 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Surgery and Complications
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersHealth Research Board
KeywordsMedicineAbdominal compartment syndromeMechanical ventilationBlood pressureProspective cohort studyAbdomenOdds ratioSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of intra-abdominal hypertension in mixed medical-surgical critically ill patients using modern definitions and measurement techniques. Secondarily to determine variables associated with intra-abdominal hypertension and ICU mortality. DESIGN: A prospective observational study. SETTING: Single institution trauma, medical and surgical ICU in Canada. PATIENTS: Consecutive adult patients admitted to the ICU (n = 285). INTERVENTION: Intra-abdominal pressure measurements twice a day during admission to the ICU. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: In 285 patients who met inclusion criteria, 30% were diagnosed with intra-abdominal hypertension at admission and a further 15% developed intra-abdominal hypertension during admission. The prevalence of abdominal compartment syndrome was 3%. Obesity, sepsis, mechanical ventilation, and 24-hour fluid balance (> 3 L) were all independent predictors for intra-abdominal hypertension. Intra-abdominal hypertension occurred in 28% of nonventilated patients. Admission type (medical vs surgical vs trauma) was not a significant predictor of intra-abdominal hypertension. Overall ICU mortality was 20% and was significantly higher for patients with intra-abdominal hypertension (30%) compared with patients without intra-abdominal hypertension (11%). Intra-abdominal hypertension of any grade was an independent predictor of mortality (odds ratio, 3.33; 95% CI, 1.46-7.57). CONCLUSIONS: Intra-abdominal hypertension is common in both surgical and nonsurgical patients in the intensive care setting and was found to be independently associated with mortality. Despite prior reports to the contrary, intra-abdominal hypertension develops in nonventilated patients and in patients who do not have intra-abdominal hypertension at admission. Intra-abdominal pressure monitoring is inexpensive, provides valuable clinical information, and there may be a role for its routine measurement in the ICU. Future work should evaluate the impact of early interventions for patients with intra-abdominal hypertension.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.326 · 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