MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3149089422 · doi:10.1007/s10633-021-09830-2

Repeated measurements of ERGs and VEPs using chloral hydrate sedation and propofol anesthesia in young children

2021· article· en· W3149089422 on OpenAlexaff
Daphne L. McCulloch, Pamela Garcia‐Filion, Marla Matar, Carly Stewart, Mark Borchert

Bibliographic record

VenueDocumenta Ophthalmologica · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntraocular Surgery and Lenses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
KeywordsChloral hydrateAnesthesiaPropofolSedationMedicineAudiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Sedation with chloral hydrate or anesthesia using propofol allow ocular examination and testing in young children, but these drugs may affect electrophysiologic recordings. We compared the flash and pattern ERGs and VEPs recorded with each drug in a cohort of young children enrolled in a prospective study of optic nerve hypoplasia (ONH) syndrome. METHODS: ERGs and VEPs to light-adapted, standard, full-field flashes, to standard and steady-state pattern-reversal (PR) were recorded with cycloplegia in 9 participants. Age range at the first session, with chloral hydrate was 8-23 mo; at the second session with propofol it was 20-29 mo. Examiners masked to the drug and clinical conditions measured the waveforms for longitudinal, paired comparisons between the sessions. RESULTS: Flash ERG amplitudes did not differ between sessions; peak times were longer at the second session (propofol) by clinically insignificant amounts (< 2 ms, p = 0.002). Standard PERGs had larger amplitudes and later peaks in the second session (propofol) than with chloral hydrate (P50 2.9 vs 4.7 μV, p = 0.016 and 43 vs 52 ms, p < 0.001; N95 4.0 vs 6.1 μV, p = 0.003 and 91 vs 98.5 ms p = 0.034.). These differences were present for those with an interval of > 10 mo between sessions (n = 5, 10 eyes) but not for those with a shorter inter-test interval (< 8 mo, p > 0.05, n = 4). Magnitudes of the steady-state PERGs did not differ between tests but the waveforms had earlier peaks at the second test with propofol. Flash VEP waveforms were present in 10/18 eyes and showed 72% agreement for recordability between sessions. Standard pattern VEPs were recordable in only a few eyes in this cohort with ONH. CONCLUSIONS: Light-adapted flash ERG waveforms were generally similar with chloral hydrate and with propofol. Larger PERGs with later peaks, found in the second session (propofol) could reflect maturation of the PERG generators, as the differences found were associated with a greater age difference between the sessions, but we do not rule out that small differences in the waveforms may be drug-related. There are insufficient VEP data from these children with ONH to identify drug-related or maturational effects on VEPs.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDocumenta OphthalmologicaSame topicIntraocular Surgery and LensesFrench-language works237,207