MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281254224 · doi:10.1097/ta.0000000000003698

A wireless ultrasound patch detects mild-to-moderate central hypovolemia during lower body negative pressure

2022· article· en· W4281254224 on OpenAlexaff
Jon‐Émile S. Kenny, Mai Elfarnawany, Zhen Yang, Andrew M. Eibl, Joseph K. Eibl, Chul‐Ho Kim, Bruce D. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsNOSM University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureCommon carotid arteryStroke volumeCardiologyDoppler effectShock (circulatory)Blood flowUltrasoundInternal medicineHeart rateCarotid arteriesRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: We have developed a wireless, wearable Doppler ultrasound system that continuously measures the common carotid artery Doppler pulse. A novel measure from this device, the Doppler shock index, accurately detected moderate-to-severe central blood volume loss in a human hemorrhage model generated by lower body negative pressure. In this analysis, we tested whether the wearable Doppler could identify only mild-to-moderate central blood volume loss. METHODS: Eleven healthy volunteers were recruited and studied in a physiology laboratory at the Mayo Clinic. Each participant underwent a lower body negative protocol in duplicate. Carotid Doppler measures including Doppler shock indices were compared with blood pressure and the shock index for their ability to detect both 10% and 20% reductions in stroke volume. RESULTS: All carotid Doppler measures were better able to detect diminishing stroke volume than either systolic or mean arterial pressure. Falling carotid artery corrected flow time and rising heart rate/corrected flow time (DSI FTc ) were the most sensitive measures for detecting 10% and 20% stroke volume reductions, respectively. The area under the receiver operator curves (AUROCs) for all shock indices was at least 0.86; however, the denominators of the two Doppler shock indices (i.e., the corrected flow time and velocity time integral) had AUROCs ranging between 0.81 and 0.9, while the denominator of the traditional shock index (i.e., systolic blood pressure) had AUROCs between 0.54 and 0.7. CONCLUSION: The wearable Doppler ultrasound was able to continuously measure the common carotid artery Doppler pulse. Carotid Doppler measures were highly sensitive at detecting both 10% and 20% stroke volume reduction. All shock indices performed well in their diagnostic ability to measure mild-to-moderate central volume loss, although the denominators of both Doppler shock indices individually outperformed the denominator of the traditional shock index. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic test or criteria; Level III.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.268
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical CareSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207