MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376225308 · doi:10.1111/aas.14265

Assessment of fluid responsiveness in children using respiratory variations in descending aortic flow

2023· article· en· W4376225308 on OpenAlexaff
Jacob Karlsson, Eric Peters, André Denault, William Beaubien‐Souligny, Cengiz Karsli, Evan Roter

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoMontreal Children's HospitalMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalReceiver operating characteristicBolus (digestion)AnesthesiaInternal medicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of the current study was to investigate the ability of respiratory variations in descending aortic flow, measured with two-dimensional echo at the suprasternal notch (ΔVpeak dAo), to predict fluid responsiveness in anesthetized mechanically ventilated children. In addition, variations in peak descending aortic flow measured with apical transthoracic echo (ΔVpeak LVOT) were examined for the same properties. METHODS: fluid bolus. Patients were classified as responders if stroke volume index increased by >15% after fluid bolus. The ability of each parameter to predict fluid responsiveness was assessed using receiver operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were analyzed, mean age and weight 43 months and 16 kg, respectively. Twelve responders and 15 non-responders were identified. ΔVpeak dAo was significantly higher in the responder group (14%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 12%-17%) compared to the non-responder group (11%, 95% CI: 9%-13%) (p = .04) at baseline. Area under the ROC curve for ΔVpeak dAo and ΔVpeak LVOT was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.52-0.89, p = .02) and 0.56 (0.34-0.78, p = .3), respectively. A baseline level of ΔVpeak dAo of >14% predicted fluid responsiveness with a sensitivity of 58% (95% CI: 28%-85%) and specificity of 73% (95% CI: 45%-92%). CONCLUSION: In mechanically ventilated children, ΔVpeak dAo identified fluid responders with moderate diagnostic power in the current study. ΔVpeak LVOT failed to predict fluid responders in the current study.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.308 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Anaesthesiologica ScandinavicaSame topicHemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyFrench-language works237,207