Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) and 144 non-obese patients to this prospective, observational, cohort study conducted at two Canadian centres. A perineural technique of axillary brachial plexus block was performed using 30 ml ropivacaine 0.5% under real-time ultrasound guidance. Sensory and motor block assessment was carried out every 5 min until 30 min after block completion in all four terminal nerve distributions (radial, median, ulnar and musculocutaneous nerve). A composite score consisting of three sensory points and three motor points was used for assessment in each nerve distribution. A failed block was defined as a score of less than 14 points out of a possible 16 points, or a sensory block score less than 7 out of 8 points 30 min after block completion. Thirty minutes after block completion, obese patients had a higher failure rate of 33.7% (34/101) compared with 17.8% (24/135) for non-obese patients, with a failure rate difference (95%CI) of 15.9% (6.4-27.1%) between the groups. The median (IQR [range]) time to achieve a successful block in obese patients was 25 (20-30 [5-30]) min, compared with non-obese patients at 20 (15-30 [5-30]) min (p = 0.003). Despite a higher sensory-motor failure rate as per the composite score, the axillary brachial plexus block provided adequate surgical anaesthesia as indicated by a low need for conversion to general anaesthetic in obese (8.6%) and non-obese patients (7.0%; p = 0.656). This study showed that despite ultrasound guidance, obese patients had a slower onset time and higher axillary brachial plexus block failure rate at 30 min compared with non-obese patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.303 | 0.082 |
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".