MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1513882256 · doi:10.2015/hc.v2i2.36

Pseudo Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

2007· article· en· W1513882256 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonis S. Manolis, Spyridon Koulouris, Kostas Kappos, Dimos Avramidis, John Pyrros, Haris Kalogeropoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueHospital chronicles/Hospital Chronicles · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Artery Anomalies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineOstiumArteryLeft coronary arteryCoronary artery diseaseStenosisRight coronary arteryIschemiaMyocardial infarctionCoronary angiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 72-year-old hypercholesterolemic gentleman with anginal symptoms Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class III and a positive thallium scintigraphy with ischemia localized to the anterior wall, was submitted to coronary angiography. Initial images indicated a distal left main coronary artery stenosis (left upper panel, large arrow). However, subsequent views pointed to a “phantom” artery imaged belatedly (right upper panel, short arrow). It was only after a tedious exercise that successful engagement of a separate ostium of another left coronary artery clarified the anatomy of this patient (left lower panel). It thus became apparent that it was a separately originating, diseased left anterior coronary artery descending (LAD) which explained the localization of this patient’s ischemia to the anterior wall. This was finally remedied with successful direct stenting of the long stenotic segment of the LAD performed during the same session (right lower panel), thus obviating emergency coronary artery bypass grafting, which would have been a plausible course of action, should one have relied upon the initial imaging perfectly mimicking a left main disease. IMAGES IN MEDICINE

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.230 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHospital chronicles/Hospital ChroniclesSame topicCoronary Artery AnomaliesFrench-language works237,207