MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292186445 · doi:10.1111/ene.15526

European Neuromuscular Centre consensus statement on anaesthesia in patients with neuromuscular disorders

2022· article· en· W4292186445 on OpenAlexaff
Luuk R. van den Bersselaar, Luc Heytens, Helga Cristina Almeida da Silva, Jens Reimann, Giorgio Tasca, Óscar Díaz‐Cambronero, Nicoline Løkken, Anna Hellblom, Philip M. Hopkins, Henrik Rueffert, Börge Bastian, Juan J. Vílchez, Robyn Gillies, Stephan Johannsen, Francis Veyckemans, Tino Muenster, Andrea Klein, Ron Litman, Heinz Jungbluth, Sheila Riazi, Nicol C. Voermans, Marc Snoeck

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersEuropean Neuromuscular Centre
KeywordsMedicineMyotonic dystrophySugammadexNeuromuscular diseaseNeuromuscular monitoringMyotonia congenitaMEDLINENeuromuscular transmissionRocuroniumPhysical therapyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnesthesiaNeuromuscular BlockadeMyotoniaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with neuromuscular conditions are at increased risk of suffering perioperative complications related to anaesthesia. There is currently little specific anaesthetic guidance concerning these patients. Here, we present the European Neuromuscular Centre (ENMC) consensus statement on anaesthesia in patients with neuromuscular disorders as formulated during the 259th ENMC Workshop on Anaesthesia in Neuromuscular Disorders. METHODS: International experts in the field of (paediatric) anaesthesia, neurology, and genetics were invited to participate in the ENMC workshop. A literature search was conducted in PubMed and Embase, the main findings of which were disseminated to the participants and presented during the workshop. Depending on specific expertise, participants presented the existing evidence and their expert opinion concerning anaesthetic management in six specific groups of myopathies and neuromuscular junction disorders. The consensus statement was prepared according to the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation) reporting checklist. The level of evidence has been adapted according to the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) grading system. The final consensus statement was subjected to a modified Delphi process. RESULTS: A set of general recommendations valid for the anaesthetic management of patients with neuromuscular disorders in general have been formulated. Specific recommendations were formulated for (i) neuromuscular junction disorders, (ii) muscle channelopathies (nondystrophic myotonia and periodic paralysis), (iii) myotonic dystrophy (types 1 and 2), (iv) muscular dystrophies, (v) congenital myopathies and congenital dystrophies, and (vi) mitochondrial and metabolic myopathies. CONCLUSIONS: This ENMC consensus statement summarizes the most important considerations for planning and performing anaesthesia in patients with neuromuscular disorders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.092
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.131
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0920.131
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0060.007
Research integrity0.0120.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations57
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of NeurologySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207