MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015170730

Non-invasive blood pressure measurement in animals: Part 1 - Techniques for measurement and validation of non-invasive devices.

2020· article· en· W3015170730 on OpenAlexaff
Alicia Skelding, Alexander Valverde

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Medicine and Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureCardiologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arterial blood pressure is a common parameter evaluated in conscious and anesthetized veterinary species. Non-invasive blood pressure measurement techniques, such as Doppler ultrasonic flow detector and oscillometry, are attractive in certain animals due to their availability and ease of use. The greatest limitation to non-invasive blood pressure monitoring can be its inaccuracy, particularly in hypotensive or hypertensive patients and in certain species. Part 1 of this 2-part review summarizes the current techniques available to non-invasively measure arterial blood pressure in animals and discusses validation of non-invasive devices. Part 2 summarizes the veterinary literature that evaluates the use of non-invasive blood pressure measurement techniques in conscious and anesthetized species and develops general conclusions for proper use and interpretation of data from non-invasive blood pressure devices.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.130 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Medicine and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207