MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154516753 · doi:10.1213/ane.0000000000005352

Obesity and Obesity Hypoventilation, Sleep Hypoventilation, and Postoperative Respiratory Failure

2021· review· en· W3154516753 on OpenAlexaff
Roop Kaw, Jean Wong, Babak Mokhlesi

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalWomen's College HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObesity hypoventilation syndromeHypoventilationPacuAnesthesiaHypercapniaObstructive sleep apneaNasal cannulaHypoxemiaIntensive care medicineSurgeryCannulaInternal medicineRespiratory systemAcidosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) is considered as a diagnosis in obese patients (body mass index [BMI] ≥30 kg/m2) who also have sleep-disordered breathing and awake diurnal hypercapnia in the absence of other causes of hypoventilation. Patients with OHS have a higher burden of medical comorbidities as compared to those with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). This places patients with OHS at higher risk for adverse postoperative events. Obese patients and those with OSA undergoing elective noncardiac surgery are not routinely screened for OHS. Screening for OHS would require additional preoperative evaluation of morbidly obese patients with severe OSA and suspicion of hypoventilation or resting hypoxemia. Cautious selection of the type of anesthesia, use of apneic oxygenation with high-flow nasal cannula during laryngoscopy, better monitoring in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) can help minimize adverse perioperative events. Among other risk-reduction strategies are proper patient positioning, especially during intubation and extubation, multimodal analgesia, and cautious use of postoperative supplemental oxygen.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations65
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207