MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3172463557

Flow meter, PEEP valve development and performance testing for use in a volume-controlled emergency use ventilator (EUV-SK1)

2021· article· en· W3172463557 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James Boire, Brent W. Roberts, Tyler Calow, Matthew Johnston, Julia Montgomery

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenturi effectExtreme ultraviolet lithographyFlow measurementEngineeringOperations managementMechanical engineeringComputer sciencePhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In March 2020 Health Canada (HC) released its “Interim order respecting the importation and sale of medical devices for use in relation to COVID-19”[1]. This led to the development, testing and HC approval of an emergency use ventilator (EUV-SK1) by a Saskatoon-based engineering and manufacturing company (RMD Engineering), with support from members of the Saskatchewan Health Authority (SHA) and subject matter experts from several colleges at the University of Saskatchewan (USask). The EUV-SK1 was designed as a volume-controlled ventilator, using medical air and oxygen. The main considerations for the design were minimizing the number of moving parts, keeping the majority of manufacturing inhouse and using readily available materials. These were important risk mitigation strategies amidst disruptions to the global supply chain and business closures during lockdown. At the start of the project, it became rapidly apparent that two of the critical components, the flow meter and the PEEP (positive end expiratory pressure) valve would have to be developed and built inhouse. The current industry standard for flow measurement in ventilators are mass flow meters, however, they were not available at the time, and all PEEP devices were of a proprietary nature, and again, unobtainable. Boyles law and the Venturi effect were leaned on, and differential pressure across an inhouse design of a variable rate mechanical orifice was used to overcome precision flow challenges. The PEEP, being the most critical component, required development of a proportionally controlled solenoid on top of a balanced check valve, both developed and produced inhouse during the pandemic. Performance testing was completed using a commercial test lung (active servo lung, ASL 5000TM, Ingmar Medical). Testing was performed using the settings provided by Table 201.104 in ISO 80601-2-80 [2]. The EUV-SK 1 was further subjected to extensive inhouse and third-party testing for reliability and safety.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMBES Proceedings→Same topicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→