MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adoption of a Novel Vasopressor Agent in Critically Ill Adults

2023· letter· en· W4385955204 on OpenAlexaff
Emily A. Vail, Nicholas A. Bosch, Anica C. Law, Hayley B. Gershengorn, Hannah Wunsch, Allan J. Walkey

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAgency for Healthcare Research and Quality
KeywordsMedicineCritically illAnnalsIntensive care medicineVasoconstrictor AgentsCritical illnessBlood pressureInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In December 2017, angiotensin II (ATII) intravenous infusion was approved in the United States for adults with septic or other distributive shock (1).This approval was based on a phase II clinical trial that demonstrated increased mean arterial pressure among patients with septic shock on norepinephrine randomized to titrated ATII versus placebo (2); subsequent practice patterns and clinical adoption were unclear.Therefore, we sought to describe ATII use in a large sample of critically ill adults receiving vasopressor therapy. MethodsWe used the PINC AI Healthcare Database, capturing approximately 25% of the acute care hospitalizations in the United States (3), to identify adults who were admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2020, with charge codes for at least one dose of an intravenous medication with vasopressor effects (ATII, epinephrine, norepinephrine, phenylephrine, or vasopressin).We excluded patients in hospitals with fewer than one patient in each study month or fewer than 25 patients who met inclusion criteria.In a secondary analysis, we restricted the cohort to patients with septic shock (identified by International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, codes using Angus criteria) (4).The primary outcome was receipt of ATII (during hospitalization).Secondary outcomes included the number and days of vasopressors received and the timing of ATII administration relative to other vasopressors.Hospital characteristics included teaching status, the presence of a cardiac surgery program (5), and safety-net hospital status.Patient characteristics included demographics; comorbidities (6-8); acute organ dysfunctions (4); shock diagnoses and thrombotic diagnostic codes present on admission (9-12); and mechanical ventilation (13), major surgery (14), cardiopulmonary bypass (5), and renal replacement therapy during hospitalization (15) from diagnosis and charge codes.We determined the proportion of patients who received ATII overall, by hospital, and by study month, and then compared the characteristics of patients who received ATII with those who did not, using standardized mean differences (SMDs) (16).To characterize

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)0.007
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.216 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the American Thoracic SocietySame topicSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207