MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250250020 · doi:10.1136/emj.20.5.471

JournalScan

2003· article· en· W4250250020 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. Wyatt, Leslie S. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueEmergency Medicine Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlasgow Coma ScaleIntubationEmergency medicineEmergency medical servicesReferralMedical emergencyEmergency departmentAnesthesiaNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Edited by Jonathan Wyatt; this scan coordinated by Lewis Jones Emergency medical technicians outperform anaesthetists! ▸ Participants were asked to perform bag-valve-mask ventilation for three minutes on a mannikin using a facemask and a two litre self inflating bag. Tidal volumes were measured and recorded by computer. The effectiveness of bag-valve-mask (defined as the proportion of ventilation attempts that achieved a tidal volume of >434 ml) was significantly greater for emergency medical technicians than for anaesthetists (p<0.001). Six of the 27 anaesthetists, but none of the 29 emergency medical technicians, were unable to produce even one “effective” tidal volume of at least 434 ml. The paper concludes that emergency medical technicians are able to perform adequate bag-valve-mask ventilation. ▴ Walsh K , Loveday K, O’Rathaille M. A comparison of the effectiveness of pre-hospital bag-valve-mask ventilation performed by Irish emergency medical technicians and anaesthetists working in a tertiary referral teaching hospital. Ir Med J2003;96:77–9. [OpenUrl][1][PubMed][2] Prehospital intubation for trauma? ▸ Prehospital care practitioners will read this controversial paper from the United States with interest. The authors prospectively collected data on 191 patients who presented with a Glasgow Coma Scale of less than 9 and a “head” Abbreviated Injury Scale score of more than two. They compared outcomes according to whether or not patients received prehospital intubation (usually by paramedics who were trained to use some anaesthetic drugs). The results indicated significantly increased morbidity and mortality associated with prehospital intubation. The authors do acknowledge some limitations in their study design—their call for a randomised controlled trial seems eminently sensible. ▴ Bochicchio GV , Ilahi O, Joshi M, et al . Endotracheal intubation in the field does not improve outcome in trauma patients who present without an acutely lethal traumatic brain injury. J Trauma2003;54:307–11. [OpenUrl][3][PubMed][4][Web of Science][5] Straddling—a solution for tracheal intubation on the ground ▸ Prehospital personnel who have struggled to intubate patients lying on the ground will find this Canadian study interesting. The authors studied the pressures required to perform oral tracheal intubations using a variety of rescuer positions on a … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DIrish%2Bmedical%2Bjournal%26rft.stitle%253DIr%2BMed%2BJ%26rft.aulast%253DWalsh%26rft.auinit1%253DK.%26rft.volume%253D96%26rft.issue%253D3%26rft.spage%253D77%26rft.epage%253D79%26rft.atitle%253DA%2Bcomparison%2Bof%2Bthe%2Beffectiveness%2Bof%2Bpre-hospital%2Bbag-valve-mask%2Bventilation%2Bperformed%2Bby%2BIrish%2Bemergency%2Bmedical%2Btechnicians%2Band%2Banaesthetists%2Bworking%2Bin%2Ba%2Btertiary%2Breferral%2Bteaching%2Bhospital.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F12722783%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=12722783&link_type=MED&atom=%2Femermed%2F20%2F5%2F471.atom [3]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DThe%2BJournal%2Bof%2Btrauma%26rft.stitle%253DJ%2BTrauma%26rft.aulast%253DBochicchio%26rft.auinit1%253DG.%2BV.%26rft.volume%253D54%26rft.issue%253D2%26rft.spage%253D307%26rft.epage%253D311%26rft.atitle%253DEndotracheal%2Bintubation%2Bin%2Bthe%2Bfield%2Bdoes%2Bnot%2Bimprove%2Boutcome%2Bin%2Btrauma%2Bpatients%2Bwho%2Bpresent%2Bwithout%2Ban%2Bacutely%2Blethal%2Btraumatic%2Bbrain%2Binjury.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F12579056%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [4]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=12579056&link_type=MED&atom=%2Femermed%2F20%2F5%2F471.atom [5]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=000180916400015&link_type=ISI

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.8950.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmergency Medicine JournalSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesCategoryInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)French-language works237,207