MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046207173 · doi:10.1111/pan.13979

Checking the basis of intraosseous access—Radiological study on tibial dimensions in the pediatric population

2020· article· en· W3046207173 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphanie Capobianco, Markus Weiß, Thomas Schraner, Jennifer Stimec, Kathrin Neuhaus, Diego Neuhaus

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Anesthesia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedullary cavityRadiographyTibiaRadiological weaponContext (archaeology)PopulationTibial tuberosityOrthodonticsAnatomySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Malposition of intraosseous needles in pediatric patients is frequently reported. Incorrect needle length and penetration depth related to the puncture site and level are possible causes. Aims Aim of this study was to analyze anatomic dimensions of the proximal tibia in the pediatric population with respect to intraosseous needle placement and needle tip position. Methods Plain lower leg radiographs of children aged from birth to 16 years of age were analyzed. Pretibial tissue layer, cortical bone thickness, and the diameter of the medullary cavity were measured at two different puncture levels. Data were analyzed as descriptive statistics and by polynomial regression plots and set in context to commonly used EZ‐IO ® needle lengths of 15 and 25 mm. Results Radiographs from 190 patients (104 boys/86 girls) were included. When fully inserted to skin level, up to 10.5% of needles do not reach medullary cavity at one and 18.5% at two patient's fingerbreadths distal to tibial tuberosity. The opposite cortical wall is touched or penetrated in 16% and 25%, respectively. Up to 96% of too deep needle tip positions occur in children younger than 24 months, as do too superficial tip positions in 59%. Conclusions Puncture level and needle length have a great influence on potential needle tip positions. Infants and toddlers are at highest risk for malpositioning. Due to relevant growth‐related differences in tibial anatomy, an age‐related and well‐reflected approach is crucial to successfully establish intraosseous access.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.262 · 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.

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

Citations18
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric AnesthesiaSame topicPediatric Pain Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207