MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407279340 · doi:10.48095/ccrvch20257

From ice to refrigerator – innovations in static donor lung preservation

2025· article· en· W4407279340 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
René Novysedlák, Janis Tavandžis, Zuzana Střížová, J Vachtenheim, Robert Lischke

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives in Surgery · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefrigerator carAstrobiologyComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The preservation of donor lungs and the effort to safely extend ischemic time while maintaining function is an important topic that the transplant community has been addressing for a long time. Recent publications, mainly from the Toronto team, have fundamentally influenced the existing standard of optimal preservation conditions, and their results provide a scientific basis for the shift from ice preservation to con­trolled hypothermia. Optimal preservation conditions are a necessary prerequisite for the safe extension of ischemic time. This brings additional potential for the development of the field and the possibility to improve the availability of lung transplantations and their outcomes. This review summarizes the key findings in the area of donor lung preservation from the first experimental attempts conducted 30 years ago to recent studies and discusses the various aspects that the change in preservation standard has influenced or is likely to influence.

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives in SurgerySame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207