MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285268540 · doi:10.1093/texcom/tgac019

Measuring “pain load” during general anesthesia

2022· article· en· W4285268540 on OpenAlexaff
Keerthana Deepti Karunakaran, Ke Peng, Delany Berry, Barry D. Kussman, Lyle J. Micheli, David Borsook

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthMAYDAY Fund
KeywordsNociceptionAnesthesiaMedicineSomatosensory systemFunctional near-infrared spectroscopyNeurosciencePsychologyPrefrontal cortexCognitionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) allows for ongoing measures of brain functions during surgery. The ability to evaluate cumulative effects of painful/nociceptive events under general anesthesia remains a challenge. Through observing signal differences and setting boundaries for when observed events are known to produce pain/nociception, a program can trigger when the concentration of oxygenated hemoglobin goes beyond ±0.3 mM from 25 s after standardization. Method: fNIRS signals were retrieved from patients undergoing knee surgery for anterior cruciate ligament repair under general anesthesia. Continuous fNIRS measures were measured from the primary somatosensory cortex (S1), which is known to be involved in evaluation of nociception, and the medial polar frontal cortex (mPFC), which are both involved in higher cortical functions (viz. cognition and emotion). Results: A ±0.3 mM threshold for painful/nociceptive events was observed during surgical incisions at least twice, forming a basis for a potential near-real-time recording of pain/nociceptive events. Evidence through observed true positives in S1 and true negatives in mPFC are linked through statistically significant correlations and this threshold. Conclusion: Our results show that standardizing and observing concentrations over 25 s using the ±0.3 mM threshold can be an arbiter of the continuous number of incisions performed on a patient, contributing to a potential intraoperative pain load index that correlates with post-operative levels of pain and potential pain chronification.

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)0.001
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 score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.631

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral Cortex CommunicationsSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207