Carotid Flow Time Compared with Invasive Monitoring as a Predictor of Volume Responsiveness in ICU patients
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Identifying patients who will have an increase in their cardiac output from volume administration is difficult to identify. We propose the use of carotid flow time, which is a non-invasive means to determine if a patient is volume responsive. Methods: Patients admitted to a critical care unit with a pulmonary artery catheter in place were enrolled. We perform a carotid flow time and pulmonary artery catheter measurement of cardiac output pre and post-passive leg raise and comparing the two. An increase of 10% change in the pre- vs. post-passive leg raise measurement would be indicative of a patient who is volume responsive. Results: We identified 8 patients who were volume responsive as determined by the gold standard pulmonary artery catheter. The sensitivity 87.5% and specificity 90.9%. Pearson correlation coefficient between PA-CO measurements and CFT was r=0.8316, indicative of strong correlation between the two measurements. Conclusion: In our patient sample of critically ill patients with pulmonary artery catheters, we found a strong correlation between corrected carotid flow times and cardiac output measurements from pulmonary artery catheters.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it