Prácticas de analgosedación y delirium en pacientes críticos de la región Panamericana e Ibérica y factores asociados a la sobresedación tras la pandemia COVID-19: resultados del estudio PANDEMIC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumen La sobresedación tiene consecuencias negativas en pacientes críticos. Desde el Comité de Analgosedación y Delirium de la Federación Panamericana e Ibérica de Medicina Crítica y Terapia Intensiva (FEPIMCTI) diseñamos un estudio transversal mediante encuesta dirigida a médicos/as de UCI: PANDEMIC (estudio Panamericano e Ibérico sobre manejo de ANalgosedación y DEliriuM en Cuidados Críticos [fepImCti]). Hipótesis Empeoramiento de dichas prácticas durante la pandemia que persistieron tras ella, con mayor sobresedación. Objetivos Percepción de prácticas de analgosedación y delirium en las UCI de las regiones Panamericana e Ibérica antes, durante y después de la pandemia COVID-19 y factores asociados a persistencia de la sobresedación pospandemia. De los 1.008 encuestados, el 25% informaron percepción de sobresedación tras la pandemia (IC 95%: 22,4%-27,8%), mayor en Sudamérica (35,8%; p < 0,001). Principal factor riesgo: hábito adquirido durante la pandemia (OR ajustado [aOR]: 3,16; IC 95%: 2,24-4,45; p < 0,001). Principal factor protector: monitorización delirium (aOR: 0,70; IC 95%: 0,50-0,98; p = 0,038) previo a la pandemia. Estos factores identificados en el estudio ofrecen una base para dirigir intervenciones futuras.
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 | 0.005 | 0.400 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".