MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of 3M transparent dressing joint 3MTM CavilonTM No Sting Barrie Film in the skin care after peripherally inserted central catheter

2015· article· en· W3029118575 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lei Tan, Qiong Hou, Wenhui Cao

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œJournal of practical nursing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePeripherally inserted central catheterCatheterSurgeryStingSkin careIncidence (geometry)BathingNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To evaluate the skin protection of the 3M transparent dressing joint 3MTM CavilonTM No Sting Barrie Film after peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC). Methods A total of 120 PICC catheter patients with lung cancer (observation time last about 3 months from starting the rearing pipe on the day to pipe-taken) were selected. They were divided into 2 groups by random digits table method with 60 cases each. Control group was given 3M transparent dressings stick in the PICC fixed place skin. Observation group was given 3M transparent dressings paste joint 3MTM CavilonTM No Sting Barrie Film. The incidence of complications in the PICC fixed place skin were observed and compared between 2 groups. Results The skin allergy, phlebitis, skin damage, total complications were 5, 4, 1, 10 cases in control group after PICC catheter and 2, 1, 3, 6 cases in observation group, and there was significant difference in the incidence of the total complications, χ2=4.23, P<0.05. Conclusion Using 3M transparent dressings joint 3MTM CavilonTM No Sting Barrie Film for skin care after PICC catheter, can effectively protect the skin after PICC catheter, reduce the incidence of adverse reactions. Key words: Catheterization, central venous; Phlebitis; Skin; Nursing care; Bandages

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œJournal of practical nursingSame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207