The Extracorporeal Life Support Organization Maastricht Treaty for Nomenclature in Extracorporeal Life Support. A Position Paper of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) was developed more than 50 years ago, initially with venoarterial and subsequently with venovenous configurations. As the technique of ECLS significantly improved and newer skills developed, complexity in terminology and advances in cannula design led to some misunderstanding of and inconsistency in definitions, both in clinical practice and in scientific research. This document is a consensus of multispecialty international representatives of the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization, including the North America, Latin America, EuroELSO, South West Asia and Africa, and Asia-Pacific chapters, imparting a global perspective on ECLS. The goal is to provide a consistent and unambiguous nomenclature for ECLS and to overcome the inconsistent use of abbreviations for ECLS cannulation. Secondary benefits are ease of multicenter collaboration in research, improved registry data quality, and clear communication among practitioners and researchers in the field.
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 | 0.011 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.010 |
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".