MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805583678 · doi:10.1089/neu.2017.5604

Validation of Intracranial Pressure-Derived Cerebrovascular Reactivity Indices against the Lower Limit of Autoregulation, Part II: Experimental Model of Arterial Hypotension

2018· article· en· W2805583678 on OpenAlexafffund
Frederick A. Zeiler, Jennifer K. Lee, Peter Smielewski, Marek Czosnyka, Ken M. Brady

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaManitoba Health
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCambridge Commonwealth TrustKorea Health Industry Development InstituteUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsMean arterial pressureMedicineAutoregulationAnesthesiaCardiologyIntracranial pressureInternal medicineBlood pressureReceiver operating characteristicInferior vena cavaPulse pressureCerebral perfusion pressurePerfusionHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this work was to explore the relationship between intracranial pressure (ICP)-derived indices of cerebrovascular reactivity and the lower limit of autoregulation (LLA) during arterial hypotension. We retrospectively reviewed recorded physiological data from piglets that underwent controlled hypotension. Hypotension was induced by inflation of a balloon catheter in the inferior vena cava. ICP, cortical laser Doppler flowmetry (LDF), and arterial blood pressure (ABP) monitoring was conducted. ICP-derived indices were calculated: pressure reactivity index (PRx; correlation between ICP and mean arterial pressure [MAP]); pulse amplitude index (PAx; correlation between pulse amplitude of ICP [AMP] and MAP); and RAC (correlation between AMP and cerebral perfusion pressure [CPP]). LLA was estimated by piece-wise linear regression of CPP versus LDF. We produced error bar plots for PRx, PAx, and RAC against 5-mm Hg bins of CPP, displaying the relationship with the LLA. We compared CPP values at clinically relevant thresholds of PRx, PAx, and RAC to CPP measured at the LLA. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was performed for each index across the LLA using 5-mm Hg bins for CPP. Mean LLA was 36.2 ± 10.5 mm Hg. Error bar plots demonstrated that PRx, PAx, and RAC increased, with CPP decreasing below the LLA. CPP at clinically relevant thresholds for PRx, PAx, and RAC displayed weak associations with the LLA, indicating that thresholds defined in TBI may not apply to a model of arterial hypotension. ROC analysis indicated that PRx, PAx, and RAC predicted the LLA, with AUCs of: 0.806 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.750-0.863; p < 0.0001), 0.726 (95% CI, 0.664-0.789; p < 0.0001), and 0.710 (95% CI, 0.646-0.775; p < 0.0001), respectively. Three ICP-derived continuous indices of cerebrovascular reactivity, PRx, PAx, and RAC, were validated against the LLA within this experimental model of arterial hypotension, with PRx being superior.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations95
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207