Patient Outcomes and Healthcare Worker Safety Related to Tracheostomy in Critically Ill Ventilated COVID-19-Positive Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tracheostomy is an essential procedure for patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation; however, it is controversial in patients with COVID-19-related acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). This multicenter case series was undertaken to determine if tracheostomies can be performed safely in COVID-19 patients without transmission of infection to healthcare providers. Seven COVID-19-positive patients that underwent tracheostomy were included in the study. Descriptive analysis was undertaken with a focus on patient-important outcomes (mortality, duration of ventilation, and time to discharge from the intensive care unit) as well as healthcare provider workplace absences due to COVID-19. All patients (100%) were discharged from hospital alive. Furthermore, healthcare providers developed symptomatic SARS-CoV2 infection as a result of being involved in tracheostomy procedures for their patients. Tracheostomies are essential when providing critical care to patients with prolonged respiratory failure. This case series suggests that tracheostomy can be performed safely under conditions that protect healthcare workers in the COVID-19 era.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".