Critical COVID-19 patient evacuation on an amphibious assault ship: feasibility and safety. A case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: An amphibious assault ship was deployed on 22 March in Corsica to carry out medical evacuation of 12 critical patients infected with COVID-19. The ship has on-board hospital capacity and is the first time that an amphibious assault ship is engaged in this particular condition. The aim is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of prolonged medical evacuation of critical patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We included 12 patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection: six ventilated patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome and six non-ventilated patients with hypoxaemia. Transfer on an amphibious assault ship lasted 20 hours. We collected patients' medical records: age, comorbidities, COVID-19 history and diagnosis, ventilation supply and ventilator settings, and blood gas results. We calculated oxygen consumption (OC). RESULTS: All patients had a medical history. The median delay from onset of symptoms to hospitalisation was 8 (7-10) days. The median Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score on admission was 3 (2-5). There was no significant increase in oxygen during ship transport and no major respiratory complication. There was no significant increase in arterial oxygen pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratio among ventilated patients during ship transport. Among ventilated patients, the median calculated OC was 255 L (222-281) by hours and 5270 L (4908-5616) during all ship transport. Among non-ventilated patients, the median calculated OC was 120 L (120-480) by hours and 2400 L (2400-9600) during all ship transport. CONCLUSION: The present work contributes to assessing the feasibility and safety condition of critical COVID-19 evacuation on an amphibious assault ship during an extended transport. The ship needs to prepare a plan and a specialised intensive team and conduct patient screening for prolonged interhospital transfers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".