MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883534321 · doi:10.1016/j.afjem.2018.07.003

Intraoperative awareness and experience with a ketamine-based anaesthesia package to support emergency and essential surgery when no anaesthetist is available

2018· article· en· W2883534321 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah Villegas, Sebastián Suárez, Joseph Owuor, Gabriella M. Wuyke, Brett D. Nelson, Javan Imbamba, Debora Rogo, Khama Rogo, Thomas F. Burke

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGrand Challenges CanadaKorea International Cooperation AgencyDepartment for International DevelopmentWellcome TrustDepartment for International Development, UK GovernmentGovernment of the United KingdomBill and Melinda Gates FoundationUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsMedicineKetamineSedationIntraoperative AwarenessEmergency surgeryAnesthesiaSurgeryGeneral surgeryPropofol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Five of the 7.2 billion people on earth have limited access to emergency and essential surgical procedures. The lack of safe, affordable and timely anaesthesia services are primary barriers to universal surgical coverage. The objective of this study was to assess intraoperative awareness when the 'Every Second Matters for Emergency and Essential Surgery - Ketamine' (ESM-Ketamine) package was used to support emergency and essential surgeries and painful procedures in rural Kenya when no anaesthetist was available. METHODS: Forty-seven consecutive adult patients that underwent an operative procedure under ESM-Ketamine at Sagam Community Hospital in Luanda, Kenya were enrolled. Participants underwent two semi-structured interviews that explored the patient's experience with ESM-Ketamine both after the operative procedure and four to six weeks after surgery. RESULTS: Forty-seven participants completed the first interview and 37 (78.7%) the second interview. Thirty-seven (78.7%) cases were procedural sedations and ten were (21.3%) emergency surgeries. Intraoperative awareness occurred in nine (24.3%) participants who underwent procedural sedation and two (20%) who underwent emergency surgery. Twenty-six (55.3%) participants reported dreams during the procedure. Thirty-two (86.5%) participants considered their experience positive, and 35 (95%) would recommend a procedure supported by ketamine to a friend. DISCUSSION: Most patients whose painful procedures and emergency operations were supported by the ESM-Ketamine package when no anaesthetist was available reported favourable experiences.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Emergency MedicineSame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207