MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407960014 · doi:10.2478/jccm-2025-0002

Intraabdominal hypertension is less common than it used to be: A pilot step wedge trial

2025· article· en· W4407960014 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shane Smith, Fran Priestap, Neil Parry, Robert Arntfield, Patrick B. Murphy, Kelly Vogt, Ian Ball

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œJournal of Critical Care Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAbdominal Surgery and Complications
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersAcademic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care unitIncidence (geometry)PopulationEmergency medicineRandomized controlled trialAbdominal compartment syndromeClinical trialRenal replacement therapyPerioperativePsychological interventionIntensive care medicineSurgeryInternal medicineAbdomen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This is a pilot study to determine the feasibility of a multicentre stepped wedge cluster randomized trial of implementing the 2013 World Society of the Intraabdominal Compartment Syndrome (WSACS) guidelines as an intervention to treat intraabdominal hypertension (IAH) and abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) in critically ill patients. Design: Single-centre before-and-after trial, with an observation / baseline period of 3 months followed by a 9-month intervention period. Setting: A 35 bed medical-surgical-trauma intensive care unit in a tertiary level, Canadian hospital. Patients: Recruitment from consecutively admitted adult intensive care unit patients. Intervention: In the intervention period, treatment teams were prompted to implement WSACS interventions in all patients diagnosed with IAH. Measurements and Main Results: 129 patients were recruited, 59 during the observation period and 70 during the intervention period. Only 17.0% and 12.9%, respectively, met diagnostic criteria for IAH. Many recruited patients did not have intraabdominal pressures measured regularly per study protocol. There was no difference in ICU mortality for patients in either cohort or between those with and without IAH. Conclusions: The incidence of IAH in our patient population has decreased significantly since 2015. This is likely due to a significant change in routine care of critically ill patients, especially with respect to judicious goal-directed fluid resuscitation. Patient recruitment and protocol adherence in this study were low, exacerbated by other staffing and logistical pressures during the study period. We conclude that a larger multicentre trial is unlikely to yield evidence of a detectable treatment effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.291
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œJournal of Critical Care MedicineSame topicAbdominal Surgery and ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207