MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4379347836 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2023.213

P.123 Metabolic acidosis and functional outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: an exploratory analysis

2023· article· en· W4379347836 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Carolane Veilleux, ME Eagles, MK Tso, RL Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsKelowna General HospitalCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetabolic acidosisAcidosisIschemiaOdds ratioSubarachnoid hemorrhageInternal medicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Little data exists on the impact of metabolic acidosis in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). Given its detrimental effects in critically ill patients, we inquired whether in patients with aSAH, metabolic acidosis (bicarbonate <22mmol/L) was associated with an increased risk of worse outcomes at 3 months (mRS >2). Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of the CONSCIOUS-1 randomized control trial dataset including all patients who had at least three bicarbonate levels drawn. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models were used to assess for independent relationship between metabolic acidosis and functional outcome at 3 months. Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) was assessed for potential effect modification. Results: Three hundred and nineteen patients were included in our analysis. There was no difference in the proportion of poor outcome between those with or without metabolic acidosis on bivariate analysis (OR=1.022, p=0.949). However, amongst individuals who develop DCI, there was increased odds of unfavorable outcome when patients developed metabolic acidosis (OR=7.588, p=0.023). Conclusions: Individuals who develop delayed cerebral ischemia may benefit from having their bicarbonate level carefully monitored. More studies are needed to determine how the development of metabolic acidosis can be mitigated, and whether its prevention leads to improved outcomes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances→French-language works237,207→