MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206378043 · doi:10.3410/f.718019895.793478552

Faculty Opinions recommendation of Neuraxial block, death and serious cardiovascular morbidity in the POISE trial.

2013· dataset· en· W4206378043 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bruce Biccard, Reitze Rodseth

Bibliographic record

VenueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature · 2013
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalMyocardial infarctionPlaceboNeuraxial blockadeAnesthesiaStroke (engine)Randomized controlled trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: This post hoc analysis aimed to determine whether neuraxial block was associated with a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) and non-fatal cardiac arrest within 30 days of randomization in POISE trial patients.METHODS: A total of 8351 non-cardiac surgical patients at high risk of cardiovascular complications were randomized to β-blocker or placebo. Neuraxial block was defined as spinal, lumbar or thoracic epidural anaesthesia. Logistic regression, with weighting using estimated propensity scores, was used to determine the association between neuraxial block and primary and secondary outcomes.RESULTS: Neuraxial block was associated with an increased risk of the primary outcome [287 (7.3%) vs 229 (5.7%); odds ratio (OR), 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.02-1.49; P=0.03] and MI [230 (5.9%) vs 177 (4.4%); OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.07-1.64; P=0.009] but not stroke [23 (0.6%) vs 32 (0.8%); OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.44-1.33; P=0.34], death [96 (2.5%) vs 111 (2.8%); OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.65-1.17; P=0.37] or clinically significant hypotension [522 (13.4%) vs 484 (12.1%); OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.99-1.30; P=0.08]. Thoracic epidural with general anaesthesia was associated with a worse primary outcome than general anaesthesia alone [86 (12.1%) vs 119 (5.4%); OR, 2.95; 95% CI, 2.00-4.35; P< 0.001].CONCLUSIONS: In patients at high risk of cardiovascular morbidity, neuraxial block was associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, which could be causal or because of residual confounding. PMID: 23611915 Funding information This work was supported by: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canada

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0930.011

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
GenreDataset

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFaculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical LiteratureSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207