Patient vital signs in relation to ICU admission in treatment of acute leukemia: a retrospective chart review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The objective of the current study was to investigate the relationship between changes in vital signs and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Windsor Regional Hospital treats 15–20 new patients a year with acute leukemia. These patients are at increased risk of neutropenic fevers and admission to the ICU following induction chemotherapy.Methods Retrospective review examined the correlation between acute leukemia patient vitals and ICU admission. The analysis included 37 patients: 7 ICU versus 30 controls. Changes were compared to baseline over 24 hours prior to ICU admission or 5 days after the initiation of induction chemotherapy in the following vital signs: heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), temperature (T), respiratory rate (RR), and fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) required to maintain a stable oxygen saturation.Results RR and FiO2 demonstrated significant change over baseline leading up to ICU admission within the ICU group. T, HR and MAP did not demonstrate significant changes over time in either group. RR, FiO2 and HR were significantly higher in the ICU group at time zero compared with the control group. RR was recorded least frequently in the 24 hours leading up to ICU admission.Discussion Changes in RR and FiO2 predicted clinical deterioration requiring ICU admission in acute leukemia patients. This is consistent with the predominant reason for ICU admission which was respiratory failure.Conclusion We present preliminary evidence to support enhanced monitoring of RR and FiO2 in acute leukemia patients following induction chemotherapy with early intervention if identified.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".