Duration of peripheral intravenous catheter patency in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the impact of saline lock to running a slow continuous infusion to-keep-vein-open (TKVO) on the total time a peripheral intravenous (PIV) catheter remained patent. METHOD: A retrospective chart review of all children admitted to the paediatric ward of a regional hospital in Saskatchewan December 1, 2013 through February 28, 2014. Characteristics of patients with PIV catheters were abstracted from the health records, including patient size, catheter size and site, and total time each PIV catheter spent (i) infusing therapeutic fluids or medications, (ii) running a TKVO infusion, or (iii) saline locked. The duration of catheter patency was compared with the proportion of time that TKVO infusions were run, as well as patient gender and age. RESULTS: During 375 admissions, there were 189 PIVs which met inclusion criteria. The proportion of nontherapeutic time a PIV catheter spent TKVO compared to saline locked did not affect the total time the PIV catheter was patent (P=0.33). Gender had no influence, but older age, a nonmodifiable factor, was associated with increased time a PIV catheter remained patent (P=0.028). DISCUSSION: Peripheral intravenous (PIV) catheter insertion can be a painful and traumatic procedure. On the paediatric ward of a regional hospital, TKVO infusions were not superior to saline lock for prolonging PIV catheter patency.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".