MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157768616 · doi:10.22514/sv.2021.058

The importance of maintaining normal perioperative physiological parameters in children during anaesthesia

2021· article· en· W3157768616 on OpenAlexaff
Is’haq Al Aamri, Gianluca Bertolizio

Bibliographic record

VenueSigna Vitae · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAnesthesia and Neurotoxicity Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmergence deliriumMedicineAnesthesiaPerioperativeDesfluraneAnestheticIntraoperative AwarenessPropofolAnesthesiologyVomitingMidazolamDeliriumPostoperative nausea and vomitingIntensive care medicineSedationSevoflurane

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Every year, millions of neonates, infants and young children need general anesthesia for a variety of procedures. As pediatric anesthesia remains at high risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality, attention has been directed towards the anesthesia training and the anesthetics safety. We are now reassured about the relatively safeness of the anesthetic drugs, but the safest intraoperative conduct has still to be determined. In the absence of clear evidence, it appears logical to prevent perturbations of the child “baseline”, by avoiding preoperative distress, maintaining normal intraoperative parameters and preventing postoperative discomfort. Recently, ten “N” principles (no fear/awareness, normovolemia, normotension, normal heart rate, normoxemia, normocapnia, normonatremia, normoglycemia, normotermia and no pain/nausea/vomiting/emergence delirium) have been proposed as the base of a safer anesthesia care. The current paper aims to summarize the current evidence behind the “10-Ns” rational and to help guide anesthesiologists in their practice.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSigna VitaeSame topicAnesthesia and Neurotoxicity ResearchFrench-language works237,207