Brachial Artery Catheterization in Swine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The video describes in detail the catheterization of the distal brachial artery in swine. This technique enables researchers to measure arterial blood pressure continuously and collect arterial blood samples to assess arterial blood gas measurements. Arterial blood pressures and arterial blood gases are important physiological parameters to monitor during experimental procedures. In swine, four common methods of arterial catheterization have been described, including catheterization of the carotid, femoral, auricular, and medial saphenous arteries. Each of these techniques have advantages, such as ease of access for the auricular artery, and disadvantages that include deep tissue dissection for carotid artery catheterization. The described alternative method of arterial catheterization in swine, the catheterization of the distal aspect of the brachial artery, is a rapid procedure that requires relatively minimal tissue dissection and provides information that is in line with data collected from other arterial catheterization sites. The procedure uses a medial approach along an oblique plane of the lower brachium, positioned between the olecranon and the flexor aspect of the elbow joint, and this approach allows researchers the major advantage of unimpeded freedom for procedures that involve the caudoventral, caudodorsal back, or hind limbs of the pig. Due to the location of the upper forelimb of the catheterized vessel and potential challenges of effective homeostasis following catheter removal from the artery, this technique may be limited to non-recovery procedures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".