PICC经不同静脉和上肢置入对穿刺成功与并发症发生影响的系统评价
Bibliographic record
Abstract
目的 系统评价经不同静脉和上肢置入PICC对穿刺置管成功率、并发症发生率的影响.方法 计算机检索Cochrane图书馆、JBI循证护理中心图书馆、MEDLINE、EMbase、CBM、CNKI辅以互联网络检索.收集所有讨论PICC经不同静脉和上肢置入对穿刺置管成功率、并发症发生率影响的随机对照试验、半随机对照试验、病例对照研究、队列研究.由2名研究员按照纳入和排除标准筛选文献并提取资料,参考Cochrane Handbook及Newcastle-Ottawa Scale的质量评价标准进行质量评价,使用RevMan5.1软件进行Meta分析或仅进行描述性分析.结果 共纳入4项半随机对照试验、14项队列研究,6 233例患者.Meta分析结果显示:PICC经头静脉穿刺的静脉炎发生率较贵要静脉高,合并效应有统计学意义[OR=0.12,95%CI(0.04,0.38),P=0.0002].PICC经头静脉穿刺的送管困难发生率较贵要静脉高,合并效应有统计学意义[OR=0.26,95%CI(0.10,0.67),P=0.005].经右侧上肢与左侧上肢穿刺的置管成功率与并发症发生率差异无统计学意义.结论 经贵要静脉穿刺在降低并发症发生率方面具有优势,经不同上肢穿刺对穿刺置管成功率和并发症发生率的影响有待进一步证实,乳癌术后患侧置管应谨慎.
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 | 0.034 | 0.156 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.004 |
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".