MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1894962606 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.406

September 2015 at a Glance

2015· article· en· W1894962606 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Metra

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureCardiac resynchronization therapyClinical trialInternal medicineCardiologyIntensive care medicineEjection fraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atrial and ventricular arrhythmias confer a substantial risk of mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure (HF). The epidemiology, clinical impact and treatment of arrhythmias in HF are thoroughly described in a joint consensus document.1 Geographic differences in HF clinical trials are reviewed and discussed in two articles.2, 3 Another review regards the epidemiologic characteristics of HF in Asia,4 extending previous data from the same continent.5-8 Two articles concern acute HF. The first evaluates the prevalence of pulmonary edema in contemporary trials.9 The second regards the pathophysiology and prognostic impact of acute HF in a specific condition, the acute aortic syndrome.10 High heterogeneity exists in HF with preserved ejection fraction.11 A new classification is proposed based on the data from two major clinical trials and its potential to identify patients with a better response to treatment is shown.12 Two articles about cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) from MADIT-CRT regard its benefit in the patients without a history of advanced HF13 and its effects on arrhythmias.14 Other articles regard biomarkers, vasodilator treatment and a recent clinical trials update. Enjoy reading!

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3420.253

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.263 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesFrench-language works237,207