MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809369688 · doi:10.23907/2018.001

Deaths from Environmental Hypoxia and Raised Carbon Dioxide

2018· review· en· W2809369688 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher M. Milroy

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Forensic Pathology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInjury Epidemiology and Prevention
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypoxia (environmental)Carbon dioxideAutopsyPoison controlForensic pathologyForensic engineeringMedicineEnvironmental scienceOxygenMedical emergencyEngineeringPathologyChemistryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews deaths in which there is an environment that is low in oxygen and/or has elevated levels of carbon dioxide. These deaths present problems to autopsy pathologists, as the autopsy is typically negative and postmortem toxicology cannot be used to detect the effects of hypoxia and raised levels of carbon dioxide. Deaths from hypoxia and raised carbon dioxide may be encountered in work-and nonwork-related environments. Typically these are accidents, but suicides may be encountered and criminal charges may follow these events. Environments that have been associated with these events include mines, tunnels, sewers, and pits. Transportation incidents may also be associated with hypoxic events, particularly aircraft and submarines. When an atmosphere low in oxygen is entered, collapse can be rapid, or immediate if the environmental oxygen is below 6%. Environments rich in carbon dioxide can also cause death, even with a high oxygen concentration. Such environments may be encountered in industrial settings, but also occur in natural disasters such as the Lake Nyos disaster. The identification of these deaths typically requires a coordinated investigation with safety inspectors and other experts in industrial- and work-related deaths.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Forensic PathologySame topicInjury Epidemiology and PreventionFrench-language works237,207