MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W63931013 · doi:10.1051/ject/2003352127

A Multicenter Investigation into the Occurrence of High-Pressure Excursions

2003· article· en· W63931013 on OpenAlexaff
Gerard J. Myers, Patrick R. Weighell, Brian J. McCloskey, Alison M. Holt, Scott McTeer, Sandy L. Maxwell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of ExtraCorporeal Technology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHigh pressureEnvironmental scienceGeologyMechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The occurrence of sudden increases in premembrane pressures and membrane pressure differentials has drawn considerable attention and debate in the perfusion community. Several terms have been applied to this phenomenon, but the term that best describes this event is "high-pressure excursion" (HPE). The exact causes of HPE are still uncertain, but nonetheless widely speculated. However, their increased appearance seems to be very closely related to the removal/absence of human serum albumin from priming solutions. To investigate the reasons why HPE occur in some cardiopulmonary bypass cases, we present our findings in a multicenter, retrospective analysis of 2696 cardiopulmonary bypass cases. Of the 31 cases of HPE that were documented from the analysis, 60 preoperative and perioperative variables were gathered from the participating tertiary care centers. Our findings indicate that these pressure excursions had an occurrence of 1.14% in the three centers involved with this analysis. The largest occurrence of HPE tended to be in male (87.1%) coronary artery disease patients (96.8%) during the presence of the IV anesthetic Diprivan (74.2%). In conclusions, HPE are not perfusate related because it occurred in the presence of three perfusate combinations. They also do not seem to be oxygenator related or exclusive to hypothermic temperatures or heat exchangers.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations21
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ExtraCorporeal TechnologySame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207