MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and cerebrovascular events: the current state of the art

2012· review· en· W1498136879 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Hynes, Josep Rodés‐Cabau

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStenosisStroke (engine)CardiologyAdverse effectInternal medicineAortic valveAortic valve stenosisAortic valve replacementIntensive care medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionized the care of high-risk patients with severe calcific aortic stenosis. Those considered at high or prohibitive risk of major adverse outcomes with open surgical aortic valve replacement may now be offered an alternative less-invasive therapy. Despite the rapid evolution and clinical application of this new technology, recent studies have raised concerns about adverse cerebrovascular event rates in patients undergoing TAVI. In this review, we explore the current data both in relation to procedure-related silent cerebrovascular ischemic events, as well as clinically apparent stroke. The timing of neurological events and their prognostic implications are also examined. Finally, potential mechanisms of TAVI-related cerebrovascular injury are described, in addition to efforts to minimize their occurrence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207