Participación de los equipos de respuesta rápida de tromboembolia pulmonar durante el perioperatorio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La tromboembolia pulmonar aguda representa una causa frecuente de morbimortalidad cardiovascular, sólo rebasada por los síndromes coronarios agudos y la enfermedad cerebrovascular. El inicio y la intervención de un equipo multidisciplinario de respuesta rápida en la tromboembolia pulmonar son imperantes para mejorar el pronóstico y reducir al mínimo las posibles secuelas en el subgrupo de pacientes más graves. En este artículo de revisión se describe y revisa de manera general el papel actual y potencial que tienen dichos equipos de respuesta rápida, con un enfoque particular en el perioperatorio. Acute pulmonary embolism represents a frequent cause of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, only exceeded by acute coronary syndromes and cerebrovascular disease. The start-up and implementation of a designated pulmonary embolism response team is necessary to improve prognosis and minimize long-term sequelae in the subgroup of patients with significant pulmonary embolism. Herein, we describe and discuss an overview of the current and potential role of pulmonary embolism response teams, with a focus on the perioperative period.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".