{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.045662100456621, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02009132420091324, 'mean_word_length': 4.924324324324324, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evaluation of a transportable capnometer for monitoring end‐tidal carbon dioxide

We compared a small and transportable Capnometer (EMMA™) with a reference capnometer, the Siesta i TS Anaesthesia. During air‐breathing through a facemask, both the EMMA (nine modules) and reference capnometer sampled expired gas simultaneously. A wide range of end‐tidal carbon dioxide values were obtained during inhalation of carbon dioxide and voluntary hyperventilation. The median IQR [range] difference between all sets of carbon dioxide values (EMMA – reference) was −0.3 (−0.6 to 0.0 [−1.7 to 1.6] kPa; n = 297) using new batteries, which was statistically significant (p = 0.04) and located to two of the nine EMMAs tested. Using batteries with reduced voltage did not influence the measurements. The 95% CI of the medians of the differences were −0.4 to −0.2. We conclude that the EMMA can slightly under‐read the end‐tidal carbon dioxide but is generally comparable with a free‐standing monitor. The precision of the EMMAs was similar whether new batteries or batteries with reduced voltage were used.