Deterioration of mechanically ventilated patients in the presence of intra-abdominal hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objective: Elevated pressure within the cavity of the abdomen is a serious complication that can threat the life of critically ill patients. Thus, there is an intense need to highlight the outcomes of intra-abdominal hypertension (IAH) that can face critical care nurses. This work aimed to explore the deterioration of mechanical ventilated patients in the presence of IAH.Methods: Design: A non-randomized prospective study. Procedures: This trial was implemented in trauma and general intensive care in the period between December 2015 and August 2016. The pressure within the abdomen was measured for each patient, three times with 8-hr interval, at the third day of mechanical ventilator (MV). Sepsis-related organ failure assessment score was measured for all patients at first day of admission. All patients who had normal intra-abdominal pressure (IAP) or developed IAH were observed, monitored and evaluated for the clinical outcomes until discharged. Results: Of the 60 MV patients, 83.3% developed IAH. Higher mean of MV and stay period among patients with increased pressure within the abdomen (14.04 ± 10.30 and 16.30 ± 9.36) than normotensive patients (6.90 ± 2.80 and 11.000 ± 3.77) with significant difference (p = .001). Non-survivor had a significantly higher mean IAP than survivor (23.266 ± 2.37 vs. 7.91 ± 3.17) (p value < .001).Conclusions: The occurrence of IAH complicated 83.3% of mechanical ventilated clients in the study period: like longer stay and use of ventilator, and high mortality rate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".