MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894236841 · doi:10.1213/xaa.0000000000000886

Noninvasive Administration of Inhaled Epoprostenol and Inhaled Milrinone in Extubated, Spontaneously Breathing Patients With Right Ventricular Failure and Portal Hypertension: A Report of 2 Cases

2018· article· en· W2894236841 on OpenAlexaff
Étienne J. Couture, Jan-Alexis Tremblay, Mahsa Elmi-Sarabi, Yoan Lamarche, André Denault

Bibliographic record

VenueA&A Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMilrinonePreloadAfterloadAnesthesiaCardiologyPulmonary hypertensionHeart failureInternal medicineHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the cases of 2 patients free from mechanical ventilation after a cardiac surgery with systemic venous congestion from right ventricular (RV) failure. Management of these patients included RV preload reduction with diuretics and RV afterload reduction with inhaled pulmonary vasodilators. Noninvasive combination of inhaled epoprostenol and inhaled milrinone through the AirLife filtered nebulizer system (CareFusion) was used. Reduction of splanchnic venous congestion was assessed by Doppler portal flow pulsatility.

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: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Case reporthigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Case reporthigh
models agreeAgreement 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.253 · 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.
Study designCase report
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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueA&A PracticeSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207