MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2986788200 · doi:10.1186/s13643-019-1204-4

Functional recovery with peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia for upper limb surgery: a systematic review protocol

2019· review· en· W2986788200 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Héroux, Emilie P. Belley‐Côté, Pablo Échavé, Marie-Josée Loignon, Pierre-Olivier Bessette, Nicolas Patenaude, Jean‐Patrice Baillargeon, Frédérick D’Aragon

Bibliographic record

VenueSystematic Reviews · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeripheralPeripheral nerveNerve blockUpper limbAnesthesiaMEDLINEPeripheral nerve injuryCINAHLSurgeryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve block is a single injection that inhibits the transmission of peripheral nerve impulses to the central nervous system. The inhibition of the nociceptive impulse may decrease the occurrence of muscle spasm following mobilization postoperatively. This mechanism may contribute to a better functional recovery following upper limb surgery. This systematic review will investigate the impact of peripheral nerve block on functional recovery after an upper limb surgery. METHODS: We will search studies comparing peripheral nerve block to general anesthesia for upper limb surgery in the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL, EMBASE, and Scopus. In duplicate, independent reviewers will assess eligibility, evaluate risk of bias, and abstract data on type of peripheral nerve block and functional outcome. Where possible, we will pool results using a random effects model. For each outcome, we will assess the quality of evidence using GRADE methodology. DISCUSSION: We aim to summarize the available evidence comparing functional recovery with peripheral nerve block versus general anesthesia for upper limb surgery. These data will inform the design of a trial on the topic. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018116298.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0240.006
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.107
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.245 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystematic ReviewsSame topicAnesthesia and Pain ManagementFrench-language works237,207