MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913471540 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2019.2898194

Optimizing Robust PID Control of Propofol Anesthesia for Children: Design and Clinical Evaluation

2019· article· en· W2913471540 on OpenAlexaff
Klaske van Heusden, Kristian Soltesz, Erin Cooke, Sonia M. Brodie, Nicholas West, Matthias Görges, J. Mark Ansermino, Guy A. Dumont

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Sedative Agents
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPropofolPID controllerAnesthesiaMedicineControl engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringTemperature control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this paper was to optimize robust PID control for propofol anesthesia in children aged 5-10 years to improve performance, particularly to decrease the time of induction of anesthesia while maintaining robustness. METHODS: We analyzed results of a previous study conducted by our group to identify opportunities for system improvement. Allometric scaling was introduced to reduce the interpatient variability and a new robust PID controller was designed using an optimization-based method. We evaluated this optimized design in a clinical study involving 16 new cases. RESULTS: The optimized controller design achieved the performance predicted in simulation studies in the design stage. Time of induction of anesthesia was median [Q1, Q3] 3.7 [2.3, 4.1] min and the achieved global score was 13.4 [9.9, 16.8]. CONCLUSION: Allometric scaling reduces the interpatient variability in this age group and allows for improved closed-loop performance. The uncertainty described by the model set, the predicted closed-loop responses, and the predicted robustness margins are realistic. The system meets the design objectives of improved speed of induction of anesthesia while maintaining robustness and improving clinically relevant system behavior. SIGNIFICANCE: Control system optimization and ongoing system improvements are essential to the development of a clinically relevant commercial device. This paper demonstrates the validity of our approach, including system modeling, controller optimization, and pre-clinical testing in simulation.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.290
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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations39
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicAnesthesia and Sedative AgentsFrench-language works237,207