Blood Pressure in Critically Ill Children: Exploratory Analyses of Concurrent Invasive and Noninvasive Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Differences and biases between directly measured intra-arterial blood pressure and intermittingly measured noninvasive blood pressure using an oscillometric cuff method have been reported in adults and children. At the bedside, clinicians are required to assign a confidence to a specific blood pressure measurement before acting upon it, and this is challenging when there is discordance between measurement techniques. We hypothesized that big data could define and quantify the relationship between noninvasive blood pressure and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements and how they can be influenced by patient characteristics, thereby aiding bedside decision-making. DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of cuff blood pressure readings with associated concurrent invasive arterial blood pressure measurements (452,195 noninvasive blood pressure measurements). SETTING: Critical care unit at The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto. PATIENTS: Six-thousand two-hundred ninety-seven patients less than or equal to 18 years old, hospitalized in a critical care unit with an indwelling arterial line. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Two-dimensional distributions of intra-arterial blood pressure and noninvasive blood pressure were generated and the conditional distributions of intra-arterial blood pressure examined as a function of the noninvasive systolic, diastolic, or mean blood pressure. Modification of these distributions according to age and gender were examined using a multilevel mixed-effects model. For any given combination of patient age and noninvasive blood pressure, the expected distribution of intra-arterial blood pressure readings exhibited marked variability at the population level and a bias that significantly depended on the noninvasive blood pressure value and age. We developed an online tool that allows exploration of the relationship between noninvasive blood pressure and intra-arterial blood pressure and the conditional probability distributions according to age. CONCLUSIONS: A large physiologic dataset provides clinically applicable insights into the relationship between noninvasive blood pressure and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements that can help guide decision-making at the patient bedside.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".