Catastrophic drug errors involving tranexamic acid administered during spinal anaesthesia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have reviewed accidental spinal administration of tranexamic acid. We performed a MEDLINE search of cases of administration of tranexamic acid during epidural or spinal anaesthesia between 1960 and 2018. No reports of epidural administration were identified. We identified 21 cases of spinal tranexamic acid administration. Life-threatening neurological and/or cardiac complications, requiring resuscitation and/or intensive care, occurred in 20 patients; 10 patients died. We used a Human Factors Analysis Classification System model to analyse any contributing factors, and the reports were also assessed using four published recommendations for the reduction in neuraxial drug error. In 20 cases, ampoule error was the cause; in the last case a spinal catheter was mistaken for an intravenous catheter. All were classified as skill-based errors. Several human factors related to organisational policy; dispensing and storage of drugs and preparation for spinal anaesthesia tasks were present. All errors could have been prevented by implementing the four published recommendations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.005 |
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 it