ArticleVeterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)2024
Validation of Noninvasive Methemoglobin and Carboxyhemoglobin Measurements Using Pulse Co-Oximeter in Healthy Dogs.
Article in Veterinary medicine (Auckland, N.Z.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To assess the agreement between pulse co-oximeter and blood co-oximeter in measuring methemoglobin (MetHb) and carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) in healthy, awake dogs. Patients and Methods: Forty-five healthy dogs were enrolled in the study. Pulse co-oximetry was performed using the Masimo Radical 7 Pulse Co-Oximeter with a Rainbow Results: A total of 45 paired MetHb and COHb measurements were collected. There was a weak correlation between the pulse co-oximeter and the blood co-oximeter readings. The correlation coefficients for MetHb and COHb were 0.0 (95% CI, -0.3 to 0.3) and 0.03 (95% CI, -0.27 to 0.32), respectively. The ICC indicated poor agreement between the pulse and blood co-oximeter for MetHb (ICC = 0.00, 95% CI: -0.12 to 0.15) and COHb (ICC = 0.03, 95% CI: -0.27 to 0.33). Bland-Altman plots revealed low mean bias but wide limits of agreement, indicating that the pulse co-oximeter overestimated MetHb by on average of 0.7% (P < 0.0001) (95% LoA: -0.5 to 2.0) and COHb by on average 0.2% (P = 0.59) (95% LoA: -4.6 to 5.0). Conclusion: Obtaining MetHb and COHb measurements with the Masimo Radical 7 Pulse Co-Oximeter is straightforward in healthy, awake dogs. However, the device does not provide accurate measurements compared to the blood co-oximeter, specifically in the range of MetHb and COHb in healthy dogs, based on the wide LoA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.