MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037878233 · doi:10.14740/jocmr4228

First Reported Use of Highly Adsorptive Hemofilter in Critically Ill COVID-19 Patients in the USA

2020· article· en· W3037878233 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sandeep Padala, Anusha Vakiti, John J. White, Laura Mulloy, Azeem Mohammed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SepsisExtracorporealSeptic shockHemodialysisRenal replacement therapyAdjuvantErythrocyte sedimentation rateInternal medicineIntensive care medicineDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) develop respiratory failure and septic shock. Extracorporeal blood purification is proposed as an adjuvant therapy for sepsis and aims at controlling the dysregulated autoimmune system. We describe our experience in treating COVID-19 patients with the oXiris ® hemofilter which adsorbs both cytokines and endotoxins, provides renal replacement therapy and has anti-thrombogenic properties. It was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under emergency use authorization for COVID-19 patients in April 2020. In our study, the use of the oXiris ® filter decreased levels of inflammatory markers including interleukin-6 (IL-6), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP), and improved clinical outcomes in two out of three patients. J Clin Med Res. 2020;12(7):454-457 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jocmr4228

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.520
GPT teacher head0.609
Teacher spread0.089 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine ResearchSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207