Systematic review and meta-analysis: value of venous blood gas in the diagnosis of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Emergency Department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: at present, arterial blood gas (ABG) analysis is widely used in the diagnosis and treatment evaluation of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in emergency department, but it has the risk of thrombosis and bleeding. In recent years, venous blood gas (VBG) analysis has become more and more popular, but its clinical diagnostic value in emergency patients with acute exacerbation of COPD remains unclear. METHODS: relevant clinical studies on the diagnosis of acute exacerbation of COPD by blood gas analysis were searched in Medline, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Elton B. Stephens. Company (EBSCO), OVID, China Biomedical Database, and Wanfang Database from the establishment of the database to January 2010 to September 2021, Meta-analysis was performed on the data with RevMan5.3. The differences of blood gas analysis indicators potential of hydrogen (pH), partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and hydro-carbonate (HCO3) were compared between the arterial blood gas group and the venous blood gas group. Heterogeneity of results was assessed with Chi2 test and I2 in RevMan5.3. RESULTS: a total of 7 articles with 1,257 subjects were included in this study. Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) scores were higher than six points. In relation to the ABG analysis and VBG analysis, there was no significant difference in the potential of hydrogen (pH) [mean difference (MD) =-0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) =0.05-0.04, Z=0.19, P=0.85]; however, there were significant differences in the partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) (MD =5.32, 95% CI =3.32-7.33, Z=5.20, P<0.00001) and hydro-carbonate (HCO3) (MD =1.05, 95% CI =0.27-1.83, Z=2.63, P=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: there were differences between ABG and VBG in the diagnosis of patients with acute exacerbation of COPD in the emergency department. Due to the small number of included literatures, further verification is needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.022 | 0.041 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".