MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008540451 · doi:10.1093/milmed/usz305

Comparison of Three Devices to Measure Pressure for Acute Compartment Syndrome

2020· article· en· W3008540451 on OpenAlex
Géraldine Merle, Marianne Comeau‐Gauthier, V. Tayari, Mohamad Nizar Kezzo, Chrouk Kasem, Faisal Al-Kabraiti, Carl Laverdière, George Xereas, Edward J. Harvey

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMilitary Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Surgery and Complications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal General Hospital
FundersOrthopaedic Trauma Association
KeywordsMeasure (data warehouse)Compartment (ship)MedicineMedical emergencyComputer scienceData miningHistoryAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Acute compartment syndrome (ACS) is a well-recognized and common emergency. Undiagnosed ACS leads to muscle necrosis, limb contracture, intractable pain, and may even result in amputation. METHODS: Three devices (Synthes, Stryker, and MY01) were compared in a pre-clinical rat abdominal compartment syndrome simulation. Simultaneous measurements of intracompartmental pressures allowed concurrent comparison among all devices. RESULTS: Large variations from the reference values are seen with the Synthes and Stryker devices. Variances are large in these two devices even under ideal conditions. The MY01 device was the truest indicator of reference pressure in this ACS model (over 600% more accurate). CONCLUSIONS: The MY01 device was the most accurate device in tracking pressure changes in this rat model of abdominal compartment syndrome.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.222
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.258 · 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