MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405494698 · doi:10.55460/1vtp-4l4k

Traumatic Tension Pneumothorax: A Tale of Two Pathologies

2024· article· en· W4405494698 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Thompson, Jay A. Johannigman, Anthony Hudson, Natacha Reis, Roxolana Horbowyj, Kristin Fagereng, Kevin R. Ward, Marc DePasquale, Runar Salte, Christopher Bjerkvig, Martin Rognhaug, Marius Svanevik, Håkon S. Eliassen, Stefan Hellander, Stefan Enbuske, Pierre Stroberg, Marcus Larsson, Christopher Funk, Dylan Pannell, Jo Schmid, Isabelle Vallée, Iain Vergie, Elon Glasberg, Ofer Almog, G. Valdez, Andrew S. Oh, Charles H. Moore, Brendan Killian, Rachel E Bridwell, Geir Strandenes, M.A. Braverman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Special Operations Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPleural and Pulmonary Diseases
Canadian institutionsOntario Neurotrauma FoundationRoyal Canadian NavySunnybrook Health Science CentreCanadian Armed Forces
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTension pneumothoraxPneumothoraxTension (geology)MedicineSurgeryMaterials scienceComposite materialCompression (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pneumothorax resulting from injury is a common phenomenon in both civilian and military trauma. A pneumothorax or simple pneumothorax is defined as air in the pleural space. A tension pneumothorax can evolve from a simple pneumothorax if there is a continued air leak from the lung without mechanism for egress. This occurs due to an expanding air volume and pressure in the pleural space. The tension pneumothorax results in obstructive shock that may be a life-threatening emergency. All types of pneumothorax can occur in patients who are non-positive pressure ventilated as well as those receiving positive pressure ventilation. Positive pressure ventilation changes the dynamics of pneumothoraces in that it can exacerbate an air leak, resulting in a simple pneumothorax evolving into a tension pneumothorax. The pathophysiology and clinical presentation of these traumatic conditions represent two differing sub-pathologies, and, although they share the same underlying physiological process in the opinion of the authors, a different approach should be adopted when considering treatment. The objective of this manuscript is to discuss the etiology, incidence, and clinical significance of simple and tension pneumothoraces. This paper will propose a uniform description of pathophysiology and diagnostic elements as well as treatment strategies. The intent is to provide a standardization of the nomenclature as well as an understanding of the physiology and clinical significance of the spectrum of pneumothoraces. Finally, we conclude with the author groups 16-point position statement on traumatic tension pneumothorax, its definition and management. The main author position is: - In spontaneously breathing pneumothorax, because of the risk of harm, suspected low incidence, high rate of misdiagnosis, and low rate of procedural success, a conservative approach is advised. - In positive pressure ventilated tension pneumothorax, the incidence is greater and the time to severe physiological impact shorter; thus a more aggressive approach is advised.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0050.006
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Special Operations MedicineSame topicPleural and Pulmonary DiseasesFrench-language works237,207