MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902314547 · doi:10.21037/jtd.2018.11.58

In vivo lung perfusion as a platform for organ repair in acute respiratory distress syndrome

2019· letter· en· W2902314547 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled Ramadan, Lorenzo Del Sorbo, Marcelo Cypel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thoracic Disease · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineARDSHypoxemiaMechanical ventilationIntensive careLungIntensive care medicineRespiratory failurePulmonary edemaHeart failureInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is characterized, according to the most recent Berlin definition, by acute onset of hypoxemia (PaO 2 /FiO 2 ≤300) and bilateral pulmonary radiographic opacities, not primarily caused by left heart failure (1). This severe clinical condition culminates from a catastrophic inflammatory response following a direct or indirect acute insult to the lung. A recent global epidemiological investigation showed that there are greater than 3 million ARDS patients per year receiving mechanical ventilation in intensive care units. While intensive care capabilities have advanced significantly, mortality in ARDS patients has not significantly diminished and remains unacceptably high, exceeding 40% in those with the most severe form (2,3). Moreover, survivors have a high risk of experiencing post-traumatic stress disorder and functional deconditioning, which may significantly decrease their quality-of-life (4).

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0100.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thoracic DiseaseSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207