Assessing the Role of Pulmonary Vasodilators in Emergency Medicine: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pulmonary vasodilators play a crucial role in emergency medicine by providing rapid relief and stabilization in acute pulmonary conditions characterized by increased pulmonary vascular resistance and hemodynamic instability. These medications act to dilate blood vessels in the lungs, thereby reducing pulmonary artery pressure and improving blood flow to optimize oxygenation and cardiac function. Methodology: In this systematic review we aim to investigate the role of pulmonary vasodilators in emergency medicine settings, focusing on their efficacy and safety in managing various conditions. The inclusion criteria for this systematic review encompassed studies published in peer-reviewed journals focusing on human subjects treated in emergency departments using pulmonary vasodilators. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was employed to assess the quality and potential biases in the observational studies included in this review, while for randomized trials, RoB 2: A revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials was used.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".