Prevalence and risk factors for intensive care unit acquired weakness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intensive care unit-acquired weakness (ICU-AW) is an acquired neuromuscular lesion and a common occurrence in patients who are critically ill. We will systematically summarize and incorporate the important risk factors and prevalence from previously published multivariate analyses for ICU-AW. METHODS: We will search the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library to identify the relevant studies about the prevalence and risk factors for ICU-AW. Two reviewers will independently review the studies for eligibility according to the inclusion criteria. Two reviewers will independently assess the quality of studies by using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for nonrandomized studies. Heterogeneity among studies will be estimated by the I statistic. RESULTS: This systematic review and meta-analysis will provide an evidence of prevalence and risk factors for the ICU-AW. CONCLUSION: We hope that our research will contribute to clinicians and public decision making about the ICU-AW.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".