For more AAMI resources on small-bore connectors, check out our Hot Topics page at www.aami.org/hottopics/connectors/index.html Stay Connected
Bibliographic record
Abstract
FAQs about Small-bore Connectors and Tubing Misconnections AAMI, ISO and an international, joint working group are making great advances toward eliminating the potential for tubing misconnections and increasing patient safety—the focus of the Small-bore Connector initiative. These advances may reach the market as early as 4th Quarter 2014. Collaboration across agencies, organizations, manufacturers, and clinicians is a crucial part of the process, which means there are a lot of people to keep informed about everything from why the initiative started to how the new ISO standards are being rolled out. The following frequently asked questions are intended to be used as a tool for understanding all aspects of the Small-bore Connectors initiative. The better this initiative is understood, the easier it will be for everyone involved to generate awareness, prepare for the transition, and adopt the new connectors. On the topic of collaboration, this information has come together due to the joint efforts
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.847 | 0.681 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".