MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246823851 · doi:10.1177/229255031502300407

Ischemic bowel as a late sequela of abdominal compartment syndrome secondary to severe burn injury

2015· article· en· W4246823851 on OpenAlexaff
Ken Sun, Betty Jean Hancock, Sarvesh Logsetty

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic Surgery · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Surgery and Complications
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreManitoba HealthChildren's Hospital Research Institute of ManitobaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSurgeryAbdominal compartment syndromeResuscitationShort bowel syndromeTotal body surface areaSeptic shockBowel resectionLaparotomyBowel obstructionAnesthesiaAbdomenSepsisParenteral nutrition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is a known complication of the large-volume resuscitation that burn patients receive. Bowel ischemia has been theorized to occur in ACS but has yet to be described in the literature. The authors report an occurrence of late bowel obstruction related to ACS-associated bowel ischemia in a burn patient. A four-year-old previously well girl sustained 70% total body surface area burns with inhalation injury. The areas injured were the anterior neck, circumferential torso from neck to waist, left arm, left thigh and two-thirds of her right thigh. Fluid resuscitation was initially administered using the modified Parkland formula. Her transfer to the regional burn unit from a local hospital was complicated by early septic shock from a line infection, which increased her resuscitation fluid requirements. Infection ultimately led to multiple instances of ACS. Intervention with percutaneous drainage led to immediate improvement; however, the episodes of ACS resulted in a late small bowel obstruction secondary to stricture, requiring a laparotomy and bowel resection.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlastic SurgerySame topicAbdominal Surgery and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207