MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041848016 · doi:10.1111/anae.15221

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection risk during elective peri‐operative care: a narrative review

2020· review· en· W3041848016 on OpenAlexfundno aff
John Schutzer-Weissmann, David J. Magee, Paul Farquhar-Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control and Ventilation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of Cancer ResearchRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust
KeywordsMedicineTransmission (telecommunications)PandemicElective surgeryIntensive care medicineInfection controlHealth careSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Risk of infectionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)CoronavirusNarrative reviewMedical emergencyEmergency medicineDiseaseSurgeryInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The protection of healthcare workers from the risk of nosocomial severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is a paramount concern. SARS-CoV-2 is likely to remain endemic and measures to protect healthcare workers against nosocomial infection will need to be maintained. This review aims to inform the assessment and management of the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to healthcare workers involved in elective peri-operative care. In the absence of data specifically related to the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the peri-operative setting, we explore the evidence-base that exists regarding modes of viral transmission, historical evidence for the risk associated with aerosol-generating procedures and contemporaneous data from the COVID-19 pandemic. We identify a significant lack of data regarding the risk of transmission in the management of elective surgical patients, highlighting the urgent need for further research.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnaesthesiaSame topicInfection Control and VentilationFrench-language works237,207