Refining the Pediatric Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since its introduction into the medical literature in the 1970s, the term multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (or some variant) has been applied broadly to any patient with >1 concurrent organ dysfunction. However, the epidemiology, mechanisms, time course, and outcomes among children with multiple organ dysfunction vary substantially. We posit that the term pediatric multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (or MODS) should be reserved for patients with a systemic pathologic state resulting from a common mechanism (or mechanisms) that affects numerous organ systems simultaneously. In contrast, children in whom organ injuries are attributable to distinct mechanisms should be considered to have additive organ system dysfunctions but not the syndrome of MODS. Although such differentiation may not always be possible with current scientific knowledge, we make the case for how attempts to differentiate multiple organ dysfunction from other states of additive organ dysfunctions can help to evolve clinical and research priorities in diagnosis, monitoring, and therapy from largely organ-specific to more holistic strategies.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it