MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4318069176 · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000000828

Impact of Time to Intervention on Catheter-Directed Therapy for Pulmonary Embolism

2023· article· en· W4318069176 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew Lehr, Phillip L. Guichet, Bhaskara Garimella, K. Krolikowski, Nancy Amoroso, Akhilesh K. Sista, Shari B. Brosnahan

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Explorations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork University
KeywordsPulmonary embolismMedicineCatheterIntervention (counseling)Intensive care medicineCardiologyInternal medicineRadiologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Cather-directed therapies (CDTs) are an evolving therapeutic option for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism (PE). Although many techniques have been studied, there is limited evidence for the impact of timing of intervention on patient outcomes. Our objective was to assess the association between time to CDT in patients presenting with PE on patient-related outcomes such as length of stay (LOS) and mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Single academic center. PATIENTS: We identified patients for which the PE response team had been activated from January 2014 to October 2021. Patients were split into two cohorts depending on whether they went to CDT less than 24 hours from admission (early) versus greater than 24 hours (late). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Data on demographics, timing of interventions, pulmonary hemodynamics, and outcomes were collected. Sixty-four patients were included in analysis. Thirty-nine (63.8%) underwent their procedure less than 24 hours from admission, whereas 25 (36.2%) underwent the procedure after 24 hours. The time from admission to CDT was 15.9 hours (9.1–20.3 hr) in the early group versus 33.4 (27.9–41) in the late group ( p ≤ 0.001). There was a greater decrease in pulmonary artery systolic pressure after intervention in the early cohort (14 mm Hg [6–20 mm Hg] vs 6 mm Hg [1–10 mm Hg]; p = 0.022). Patients who received earlier intervention were found to have shorter hospital LOS (4 vs 7 d; p = 0.038) and ICU LOS (3 vs 5 d; p = 0.004). There was no difference in inhospital mortality between the groups (17.9% vs 12%; p = 0.523). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent CDT within 24 hours of admission were more likely to have shorter hospital and ICU LOS. The magnitude of change in LOS between the two cohorts was not fully explained by the difference in time to CDT. There were modest improvements in pulmonary hemodynamics in the patients who underwent CDT earlier.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care ExplorationsSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207