MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297996231 · doi:10.1638/2022-0019

A PRELIMINARY STUDY TO EVALUATE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAYS IN ANESTHETIZED BIGHORN SHEEP (OVIS CANADENSIS) LAMBS

2022· article· en· W4297996231 on OpenAlexaff
Olivia Hee, M. Claire Windeyer, Kathreen E. Ruckstuhl, Peter Neuhaus, Nigel Caulkett

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedetomidineAnesthesiaAtipamezoleTidal volumeCuffMedicineLaryngeal mask airwayVentilation (architecture)Respiratory systemAirwayHeart rateBlood pressureSurgeryAnatomyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemical immobilization of wildlife, required for many biological studies and management events, often induces hypoxemia and respiratory depression. Laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) have shown promise as an efficient method of airway protection during anesthesia. Nineteen wild bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) lambs were immobilized using an IM combination of medetomidine (0.16 ± 0.062 mg/kg), azaperone (0.20 ± 0.058 mg/kg), and alfaxalone (0.54 ± 0.21 mg/kg) via remote injection. Upon recumbency, arterial blood gas parameters, minute ventilation (VE), tidal volume (VT), and respiratory rate were measured before and after LMA placement. The VE and VT were measured via respirometer. Time to LMA placement, cuff pressure, cuff volume, and ease of placement were measured. Medetomidine was reversed with IM atipamezole at five times the medetomidine dose upon completion of procedures. Pre- and post-LMA measurements were compared using a t test or a Wilcoxon signed-rank test based on normality of the data. The LMA provided a patent airway in all lambs with a significant (P < 0.0001) increase in VE (mean [95% CI]; pre-LMA: VE = 17.3 [16.2–18.5] L/min, post-LMA: VE = 19.8 [18.6–21.0] L/min) but did not have a significant impact on partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2; pre-LMA: corrected PaO2 = 45.2 [41.2–49.2] mm Hg, post-LMA: corrected PaO2 = 47.5 [43.3–51.7] mm Hg; P = 0.19) or partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2; pre-LMA: PaCO2 = 50.4 [46.6–53.2] mm Hg, post-LMA: PaCO2 = 51.6 [48.8–55.7] mm Hg; P = 0.035) following placement. This study demonstrated that the LMA is a viable option for airway protection in wild bighorn sheep.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Zoo and Wildlife MedicineSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207