MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Hypoxic respiratory failure: ventilation and chest wall inspiratory muscle function in severe COPD

2024· article· en· W4404101001 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Ji, Jenny Jagers, Giovanni Tagliabue, Woo Surng Lee, Eric Wilde, Andrew McIvor, Paul A. Easton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonChinook Regional HospitalMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCOPDCardiologyRespiratory systemRespiratory failureLung functionVentilation (architecture)Internal medicineLung

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Type 1 respiratory failure is hypoxia with PaO2 < 60mmHg without hypercapnia in patients with respiratory distress. To elucidate the impact of hypoxic respiratory failure in severe COPD, we examined ventilation and respiratory muscle function during sustained hypoxia. Methods: Fine-wire EMG was implanted in parasternal intercostal (PARA) muscles of severe COPD (N=7, FEV1 0.87L 32%pred). We measured airflow, SpO2, ETCO2 and PARA EMG activity during room air followed by 20 min isocapnic hypoxia (SpO2 ~80%). We report 4 min room air (BASE), sustained hypoxia: 2 min after reaching SpO2 80% (PEAK) and final 4 min (PLATEAU), and 4 min room air (RECOVERY). Results: Minute ventilation (VI) increased from BASE-PEAK then decreased to PLATEAU (p<0.01). Changes in VI were related to tidal volume and mean inspiratory flow (p<0.05), without changes in respiratory timing. Peak PARA EMG showed marked increase from BASE-PEAK followed by significant decline with sustained hypoxia (p<0.05). Conclusions: In severe COPD, hypoxic respiratory failure elicited a transient and fleeting ventilatory pattern with marked depression in breathing with sustained hypoxia. Significant recruitment of chest wall muscle was noted during acute hypoxia, however, abated in a temporal manner with sustained desaturation. Loss of ventilation and chest wall respiratory muscles poses a risk of hypoxic respiratory deterioration in severe COPD. erj;64/suppl_68/PA1668/F1 F1 F1

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→