MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3205284759

How I Do It: Technical report on surgically-initiated rectus sheath catheter using catheter-over-needle assembly.

2021· article· en· W3205284759 on OpenAlexaff
Vivian Ip, Jaasmit Khurana, Niels-Erik Jacobsen, Adrian Fairey, Rakesh V. Sondekoppam

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAnesthesia and Pain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRectus sheathCatheterSurgeryAbdominal wall
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Development of chronic postsurgical pain following major abdominal or pelvic surgeries is increasingly recognized. Multimodal analgesia including regional anesthesia such as rectus sheath block is growing in popularity. While the literature mainly describes ultrasound-guided rectus sheath blocks, there are many advantages to surgically-initiated rectus sheath catheter performed at the end of surgery. In this technical description, we describe the rationale and technique of surgical insertion of rectus sheath catheters following major urologic surgery with midline incision which is routinely performed by urologists at our institution. Furthermore, we would like to highlight the type of catheter used during rectus sheath catheter insertion, namely the catheter-over-needle assembly. It is simple to insert while minimizes complications such as local anesthetic leakage at the insertion site causing dressing disruption and premature catheter dislodgement, as the catheter-over-needle assembly fits snugly with the skin after insertion.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.008

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicAnesthesia and Pain Management→French-language works237,207→