Bibliographic record
Abstract
www.ismp-canada.org/err_index.htm Neuromuscular blocking agents, also known as paralyzing agents, are high-alert medications. They paralyze muscle function by blocking the connection between nerves and muscles. Notably, the muscles that are essential for breathing become paralyzed in patients who receive these medications—these patients need to be immediately ventilated. Serious injuries and deaths have occurred with substitution errors involving these drugs.1-4 Incidents involving inadvertent administration of neuromuscular blocking agents and recommendations for prevention of error have been highlighted in previous issues of the ISMP Canada Safety Bulletin.1,2 The purpose of the current bulletin is to affirm the progress that has been made in the packaging and labelling of these drugs, in an effort to sustain key safety improvements. Background In 2006, ISMP Canada convened a meeting of representatives of Canadian manufacturers of neuromuscular blocking agents. The intent was to collaborate in identifying opportunities to reduce the risk for accidental administration of a neuromuscular blocking agent because of a product mix-up.5 The pharmaceutical representatives agreed upon several ideal packaging and labelling features for neuromuscular blocking agents to help differentiate them from all other drugs:5 • red cap with white lettering: “Paralyzing Agent ” or “Warning: Paralyzing Agent” • red ferrule (metal seal) with white lettering:
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 | 0.008 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.211 | 0.074 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".