MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415079915 · doi:10.1016/j.amj.2025.09.004

Prospective Development and Validation of a Weight Prediction Tool for Patients With Obesity Undergoing Critical Care Transport Using Width and Arm Circumference

2025· article· en· W4415079915 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Williams, Michael Peddle, Justin Smith, Mahvareh Ahghari, Brodie Nolan

Bibliographic record

VenueAir Medical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTrauma and Emergency Care Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpeditingCircumferenceProspective cohort studyWeight lossObesityWaistBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Obesity rates are rising, affecting health care systems and causing potential delays in critical care transfers. Accurate weights are important for critical care transport to ensure the appropriate transport asset is selected and dispatched in a timely fashion. Inaccurate weight measurements can lead to various unnecessary delays, including not sending appropriate nonbariatric assets, delays due to secondary dispatch, and delays due to systemic overuse of these bariatric capable assets. The primary objective of this study was to develop and validate a weight prediction tool for patients with obesity undergoing critical care transport. The secondary objective was to compare the performance of this model to the Crandall weight prediction tool. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted, collecting data from patients transported by Ornge air ambulance between May 2022 and April 2023. Adults weighing >100 kg undergoing interfacility transfers were included. Four predictive models, using height, arm circumference, width, and girth measurements, were evaluated against actual patient weights and analyzed separately for males and females. Model performance was evaluated by mean squared error, mean absolute error (MAE), mean absolute percentage error, R 2 , and F-statistic. Results The Ornge model using arm circumference and width demonstrated the highest accuracy and stability in predicting patient weight for both males and females. This model exhibited the lowest MAE of 12.2 kg, was within a margin of 20% error 91.2% of the time, and had an overall false negative error of 6.9%, outperforming all other models. Conclusion The Ornge arm circumference and width-based model offers a reliable method for predicting patient weight in air ambulance settings. Implementing this tool could improve the efficiency and safety of patient transfers by reducing delays caused by inaccurate weight estimations, thereby expediting access to critical care. Further research is recommended to validate these findings in larger and more diverse populations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAir Medical JournalSame topicTrauma and Emergency Care StudiesFrench-language works237,207