MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7070791595

Procedural Table Equipment Retrofit

2014· report· en· W7070791595 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2014
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicClay minerals and soil interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Table (database)TSG101WeldingNucleofection
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a team we are responsible for the Procedural Table Equipment Retrofit project sponsored by the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority. Specifically, the team is tasked with designing a fast deploying footrest and a fluid collection system for the mobile padded procedural table used for dilation and curettage at the Women’s Hospital at the Health Sciences Centre. With the aforementioned features installed, the staff at the Women’s Hospital will gain access to a mobile procedural table capable of being used for dilation and curettage. Having access to said equipment will increase the overall efficiency of operations within the hospital. The footrest the team has designed is made out of 14 Ga. stainless steel wrapped around a support structure composed of welded bar stock. The footrest is attached to the table at the rails of the backrest where a sliding pin mechanism is located to lock the footrest in place. The footrest is lightweight (10kg, ~ 25% lighter than the original) and takes three seconds to deploy the footrest in three simple steps: lift, pull and lower. The sliding pin mechanism consists of two engagement pins and one sliding pin (shoulder bolt), where all three pins are 9.5 mm in diameter. Using FEA and analytical tools, we confirmed that the footrest can safely support the maximum weight of a patient (137 kg) sitting on the footrest, and withstand 25 years of service when subjected to 18.5% of a 137 kg person’s body weight. The fluid collection system the team has designed is composed of a purchased pan that is supported and deployed by C-channels. The fluid collection system is located relative to the patient’s uterus and provides a working surface for the doctor to place his/her tools during surgery. Using FEA and analytical tools, we confirmed that the pan can safely support the maximum weight of 6 kg which includes 2L of fluid and the weight of the surgical tools. Our proposed retrofit design is made entirely of 304 stainless steel, except the shoulder bolts, which are made of 316 stainless. The retrofit will cost $1754.15, which is under budget by […]

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.024

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicClay minerals and soil interactionsFrench-language works237,207