MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W32284939

A comparison between single and double-pump syringe changes of intravenous inotropic medications in children.

2004· article· en· W32284939 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIntravenous Infusion Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyringeSyringe driverInfusion pumpMedicineAnesthesiaInotropeConsistency (knowledge bases)Internal medicineComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine the consistency of dosage delivery of inotropic medications when changing syringes in syringe pumps. Two nursing practices of syringe changes were compared: single-pump (SP) versus double-pump (DP). The SP syringe change involved using one and the same pump, and changing only the syringe. The DP syringe change involved using another pump. This other pump infuses simultaneously, for a period of time, at the same dose as the pump containing the syringe that is to be discarded. Data collection included the volume and concentration of fluid when the syringes were changed. Volume measurement, biochemical analysis and spectrophotometry were used to analyze the data. The findings suggest that the DP practice for syringe changes provides better consistency in the dosage delivery of inotropic medications. However, the SP practice can also be highly suitable when considering the overall benefits and risks of both practices of syringe changes. Implications for nursing are discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.606
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.198 · 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