MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409663688 · doi:10.1097/cce.0000000000001260

Invasive Pleural Manometry to Explore the Physiology Behind Paradoxical Compliance Response to Abdominal Compression—A Case of “Unexpandable” Lung in Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

2025· article· en· W4409663688 on OpenAlexaff
Charles-Étienne Martel-Pelletier, Brian Laufer, Marc Brosseau, Julien Viau-Lapointe, Jan-Alexis Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Care Explorations · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsARDSMedicineRespiratory physiologyIntensive care medicineCompliance (psychology)Context (archaeology)Respiratory distressPulmonary complianceAcute respiratory distressMechanical ventilationLungAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recent reports have described an intriguing pathophysiological phenomenon in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), with the paradoxical improvement of respiratory mechanics after maneuvers raising intra-abdominal pressure in the context of low positive end-expiratory pressure. CASE SUMMARY: We hereby present a case exhibiting this paradoxical physiology during mechanical ventilation for severe COVID-19-associated ARDS and discuss the findings of our physiologic assessment of this condition with invasive pleural manometry performed at the bedside. CONCLUSIONS: Even though it is rare, awareness of this intriguing condition is paramount to the critical care physician as the lung mechanics of these patients can deteriorate with traditional treatment strategies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designCase report
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Care ExplorationsSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207