MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200246377 · doi:10.1111/pan.14358

Ventilatory management of critically ill children in the emergency setting, during transport and retrieval

2021· review· en· W4200246377 on OpenAlexaff
Shelley Riphagen, Ruth Bird

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Anesthesia · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCritically illIntensive care medicineResuscitationCritical illnessIntensive careCardiorespiratory fitnessIntubationEmergency medicinePhysical therapyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical illness in children is uncommon. The acute stabilization and resuscitation of critically ill children remains challenging to even the most experienced operator. Cardiorespiratory illness represents the largest subgroup of diseases causing critical illness and, thus adds a layer of complexity and additional challenge to the safe intubation and establishment of effective ventilation of this group of children. Children have unique physiological and anatomical differences to adults, and present the team involved in their resuscitation and stabilization with challenges exaggerated by critical illness. The consideration of pathophysiological implications of disease and the equipment available during transport and retrieval from the roadside or nonspecialist setting to pediatric intensive care allows the clinician involved in resuscitation, stabilization, and establishment of ventilation to employ targeted strategies to optimize ventilatory success. This review focuses on the types of ventilatory challenges that must be addressed when managing critically ill children in the local settings in which they present, and the resources available to optimize the outcome prior to and during transfer to a higher level of care.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePediatric AnesthesiaSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207