MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996881540 · doi:10.4103/bc.bc_60_19

Selective retrograde cerebral cooling in complete cerebral circulatory arrest

2019· article· en· W2996881540 on OpenAlexaff
BridgetC Vaughan, Melissa Jones, IkennahL Browne, JustinM Olshavsky, RobertD Schultz

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Circulation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCirculatory systemHypothermiaNeuroprotectionAnesthesiaStroke (engine)CardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Cerebral hypothermia is a known neuroprotectant with promising applications in the treatment of ischemic events. Although systemic cooling is standard in post-cardiac arrest care, the deleterious effects of whole-body cooling have precluded it from translation into a viable treatment option for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Selective cerebral cooling has been proposed as a method to minimize these risks while granting the neuroprotection of therapeutic hypothermia in AIS. METHODS: = 3), the efficacy of selective retrograde cerebral cooling through the internal jugular vein was evaluated in the setting of complete cerebral circulatory arrest. Furthermore, a novel endovascular device and cooling system enabling selective retrograde cerebral cooling were studied in a normothermic perfused cadaver. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Neurologic assessment of animals receiving this therapy reflected substantial neuroprotection in animals undergoing both 15 min and 30 min of otherwise catastrophic complete cerebral circulatory arrest. The novel endovascular device and cooling system were validated in human anatomy, demonstrating successful cerebral cooling, and feasibility of this mechanism of selective retrograde cerebral cooling.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain CirculationSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207