MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206611799 · doi:10.2217/cer-2021-0258

Early mobilization in enhanced recovery after surgery pathways: current evidence and recent advancements

2022· article· en· W4206611799 on OpenAlexafffund
Reeana Tazreean, Gregg Nelson, Rosie Twomey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Effectiveness Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEnhanced Recovery After Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPrehabilitationMedicineMobilizationPerioperativeIntensive care medicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationAdverse effectPhysical therapySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Early mobilization is a crucial component of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways that counteract the adverse physiological consequences of surgical stress and immobilization. Early mobilization reduces the risk of postoperative complications, accelerates the recovery of functional walking capacity, positively impacts several patient-reported outcomes and reduces hospital length of stay, thereby reducing care costs. Modifiable barriers to early mobilization include a lack of education and a lack of resources. Education and clinical decision-making tools can improve compliance with ERAS mobilization recommendations and create a culture that prioritizes perioperative physical activity. Recent advances include real-time feedback of mobilization quantity using wearable technology and combining ERAS with exercise prehabilitation. ERAS guidelines should emphasize the benefits of structured postoperative mobilization.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations298
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Effectiveness ResearchSame topicEnhanced Recovery After SurgeryFrench-language works237,207