MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367394142 · doi:10.1002/emp2.12951

Preventing unrecognized esophageal intubation in the emergency department

2023· article· en· W4367394142 on OpenAlexaff
John C. Sakles, C. H. Ross, George Kovács

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAirway Management and Intubation Techniques
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCapnographyIntubationLaryngoscopyEmergency departmentAirwayAnesthesiologyAirway managementIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaTracheal intubation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tracheal intubation is a commonly performed procedure on critically ill patients in the emergency department. It is associated with many serious complications, one of the most dangerous being unrecognized esophageal intubation, which can result in anoxic brain injury, cardiac arrest, or death. It is the responsibility of the emergency physician to do everything possible to avoid this devastating complication. Preventing unrecognized esophageal intubation requires a two-pronged approach. First, the inadvertent placement of intended tracheal tubes into the esophagus must be reduced as much as is humanly possible. This can be achieved with the routine use of video laryngoscopes for emergency department intubations. Numerous studies have demonstrated that use of video laryngoscopes can significantly reduce the occurrence of esophageal intubation, presumably by providing an improved view of the larynx. Second, if an esophageal intubation inadvertently occurs, it must be rapidly identified and appropriately addressed. The cornerstone of rapid identification is the use of continuous waveform capnography to detect exhaled carbon dioxide. Capnography has been shown to be the most accurate method to determine tube placement after intubation. Standard clinical examinations, for example, auscultation of breath sounds, visualization of chest excursion, and observation of condensation in the tube, have all been demonstrated in studies to be unreliable and thus should not be used to exclude esophageal intubation. Recently, the Project for Universal Management of Airways, an international collaborative of airway experts from anesthesiology, critical care and emergency medicine, published evidence-based guidelines to specifically address the issue of preventing unrecognized esophageal intubation. These guidelines, which have received endorsement from several prominent airway societies, including the Society for Airway Management, the Difficult Airway Society, and the European Airway Management Society, will be briefly discussed in this review.

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 score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of Emergency Physicians OpenSame topicAirway Management and Intubation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207