MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4212881796 · doi:10.1177/0310057x211062240

Caudal catheter placement for repeated epidural morphine doses after neonatal upper abdominal surgery

2022· article· en· W4212881796 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnaesthesia and Intensive Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPediatric Pain Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaMorphineNeonatal intensive care unitCatheterSurgeryIntensive care unitOpioidAbdominal surgeryIntensive care medicinePediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective pain control after major surgery in neonates presents many challenges. Parenteral opioids (and co-analgesics) are often used but inadequate analgesia and oversedation are not uncommon. Although continuous thoracic epidural analgesia is highly effective and opioid-sparing, its associated risks and the need for staff with specialised skills and/or neonatal intensive care unit staff buy-in may preclude this option even in many academic centres. We present the case of a six-day-old infant who underwent upper abdominal surgery and received intermittent morphine doses via a tunnelled caudal epidural catheter, which provided satisfactory analgesia and facilitated early extubation.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.806

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.241 · 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