MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4401877461 · doi:10.1007/s12630-024-02809-y

Aspiration under anesthesia: what happens after we sound the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist alarm?

2024· letter· en· W4401877461 on OpenAlexaff
Justyna Bartoszko, Wilton A. van Klei

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie · 2024
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnesthesiologyPerioperativeMedicineALARMPatient safetyAgonistDiversity (politics)Intensive care medicineReceptorAnesthesiaInternal medicineHealth carePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0330.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie→Same topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes→French-language works237,207→