MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intravenous Dexmedetomidine for the Treatment of Shivering During Cesarean Delivery Under Neuraxial Anesthesia: A Randomized-controlled Trial

2020· article· en· W3031159627 on OpenAlexaff
Christina Lamontagne, Sandra Lesage, Éric Villeneuve, Elsa Lidzborski, Alex Derstenfeld, C. Crochetieìe

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetric Anesthesia Digest · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermal Regulation in Medicine
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShiveringMedicineDexmedetomidineAnesthesiaNeuraxial blockadeRandomized controlled trialBolus (digestion)Cesarean deliveryIntravenous bolusSurgeryPregnancySedationSpinal anesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth. 2019;66:762–771) Neuraxial anesthesia is preferable for cesarean deliveries (CDs), as it allows mothers to be awake and avoids the associated risks of general anesthesia. However, an estimated 53% of patients under neuraxial anesthesia suffer from shivering. Uncontrolled shivering intervenes with vital sign monitoring, causes physiological stress, and affects a patient’s satisfaction and comfort. The most common pharmacological treatment for shivering is meperidine (a synthetic opioid). However, as this drug becomes increasingly scarce in North American hospitals, an effective alternative agent is desired. Dexmedetomidine is an alternative treatment for shivering and can alleviate shivering while avoiding side effects associated with opioids. The aim of this study was to test whether a single bolus of 30 μg intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine, administered 5 minutes after childbirth, could reduce shivering during CD under neuraxial anesthesia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetric Anesthesia DigestSame topicThermal Regulation in MedicineFrench-language works237,207