MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885383088 · doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111009

In critically ill children, fluid overload is consistently associated with worse outcomes

2018· letter· en· W2885383088 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan P. Barbaro, Eddy Fan

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ evidence-based medicine · 2018
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemToronto General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritically illIntensive care medicineMedicineCritical illness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Commentary on: Alobaidi R, Morgan C, Basu RK, et al . Association between fluid balance and outcomes in critically ill children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 2018;172(3):257–268. Early goal-directed fluid resuscitation is the foundation of paediatric clinical practice parameters for septic shock and hypovolaemic shock management.1 Moderating fluid resuscitation is the observation that fluid overloaded children have higher mortality rates and longer lengths of stay.2 The Fluid Expansion as Supportive Therapy randomised controlled trial found African children with febrile illness and impaired perfusion who received fluid bolus therapy had a higher mortality rate than those who received no bolus therapy. However, it was conducted in hospitals without intensive care units and therefore does not generalise to high resource states.3 This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the measure and definition of fluid overload and its association with …

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational · Not applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ evidence-based medicineSame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207