MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211029527 · doi:10.5737/236880763217580

The incidence of perioperative anemia and iron deficiency in patients undergoing gyne-oncology surgery

2022· article· en· W4211029527 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Saudia Jadunandan, Ruby Tano, Danielle Vicus, Jeannie Callum, Yulia Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood transfusion and management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreQuest University CanadaUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMedicineAnemiaPerioperativeIncidence (geometry)Observational studyBlood transfusionRetrospective cohort studyIron-deficiency anemiaSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preoperative anemia is progressively being recognized as a risk factor for poor perioperative outcomes including increased length of hospital stay and increased blood transfusions. The growth in prevalence of preoperative anemia in patients undergoing gynecological oncology procedures warrants greater attention to early identification for optimal surgical outcomes. This was a quantitative retrospective observational study consisting of 284 patients undergoing gynecological oncology procedures. The study sought to determine the frequency of anemia, iron deficiency and the effect of anemia on the number of blood transfusions from January 1 to December 31, 2014. Patients with anemia had significantly higher transfusion rates (44% versus 11%, p < 0.0001), considerably higher number of units transfused per patient (mean 1.19 units versus 0.28 units, p < 0.0001) and longer length of stays post-operatively (mean 5.9 days versus 4.6 days, p=0.0008). It was concluded that early identification and treatment of anemia is a key opportunity to optimized surgical outcomes.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.521
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicBlood transfusion and managementFrench-language works237,207