MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205732954 · doi:10.1111/anae.15604

Clinical applications of point‐of‐care ultrasound in brain injury: a narrative review

2022· review· en· W4205732954 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Dinsmore, Lashmi Venkatraghavan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUltrasoundRadiologyTranscranial DopplerIntracranial pressurePoint of care ultrasoundNeurointensive careIntensive care medicinePoint of careTraumatic brain injuryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of point-of-care ultrasound has increased considerably over the last two decades. It has become a readily available, non-invasive bed-side modality for the rapid diagnosis and management of patients in various settings. Point-of-care ultrasound for assessing the heart, lung, abdomen, airway and vascular systems is now well established. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound for assessing cerebral blood flow has been in use for many years. In recent years, brain ultrasonography has been shown to be a powerful tool in the rapid bed-side assessment of cerebral haemodynamics and structural pathology. Brain ultrasound has been shown to be useful in both the emergency department and neurocritical care setting for the non-invasive assessment of raised intracranial pressure, cerebral autoregulation and diagnosis of intracranial haematoma and other space-occupying lesions. Point-of-care ultrasound is an important alternative technique to routine imaging and invasive monitoring techniques, and results are comparable. Competence is easily attainable without formal radiology training. With technological advancement, applications for the use of brain ultrasound continue to grow. This review discusses the clinical use of point-of-care ultrasound in the diagnosis and management of brain injury.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnaesthesiaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207