MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205045016 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxab079

The clinical effect of glucose meter selection upon the detection of neonatal hypoglycemia

2021· article· en· W3205045016 on OpenAlexaff
Kayla Parker, Martha E. Lyon, Barry D. Kyle, Lannae Strueby, Mark D. Inman

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Health AuthoritySaskatchewan HealthUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypoglycemiaMedicinePoint-of-care testingNeonatal hypoglycemiaIntensive care medicineGlucose meterPopulationPoint of careGold standard (test)PediatricsInternal medicinePathologyEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neonatal hypoglycemia is a common, transitional metabolic state that may lead to poor neurodevelopmental outcomes if unrecognized or managed inadequately. Given its frequency of presentation and immense clinical significance, a myriad of clinical practice guidelines have been published outlining appropriate screening, diagnosis, and treatment principles-many endorsing the use of glucose point-of-care testing (POCT). Unfortunately, the well-intended 'march' toward POCT, with bedside glucose meters as screening devices in the NICU, has resulted in unintended consequences with critical implications: a lack of international traceability to the 'gold' standard glucose method by POCT devices, under-recognition of POCT limitations, and a reliance upon a technology primarily driven to detect hyperglycemia in the adult population as opposed to neonatal hypoglycemia. As providers continue to advocate for improved POCT, there must be robust communication between providers and the clinical laboratory in the selection, standardization, and interpretation of glucose POCT to ensure optimal neonatal glucose detection.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.287
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.287
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patientsFrench-language works237,207