MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794271556 · doi:10.1097/mcc.0000000000000485

Is hemoglobin good for cerebral oxygenation and clinical outcome in acute brain injury?

2018· review· en· W2794271556 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Critical Care · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHemoglobin structure and function
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineHemoglobinOxygenationAnemiaIschemiaOxygen deliveryPathophysiologyAnesthesiaIntensive care medicineInternal medicineOxygen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of this review is to highlight the role of hemoglobin in cerebral physiology and pathophysiology. We review the existing as well as recent evidence detailing the effects of red blood cell transfusion on cerebral oxygenation and clinical outcome. RECENT FINDINGS: Hemoglobin is a key component in oxygen delivery, and thus cerebral oxygenation. Higher hemoglobin levels and red blood cell transfusion are associated with higher cerebral oxygen delivery and decreased cerebral ischemic burden. Recent studies suggest that this may be associated with improved clinical outcomes. However, these results are limited to only a few, small studies and the results have not been consistent. Further studies are required. SUMMARY: Hemoglobin is important for cerebral oxygenation and strategies to minimize anemia should be undertaken. Although higher hemoglobin levels are associated with less cerebral ischemia and better clinical outcome, whether this remains true whenever red blood cell transfusion is used to achieve this result remains unclear.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.333 · 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