MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965541678 · doi:10.1177/021849230201000309

Outcome following Repair of Sinus Venosus Atrial Septal Defects in Children

2002· article· en· W1965541678 on OpenAlexaff
Jennifer Russell, Jacques G. LeBlanc, Margaret L Deagle, James E. Potts

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Cardiovascular and Thoracic Annals · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStenosisSuperior vena cavaSurgeryShunt (medical)Sinus venosusCardiologySinus rhythmCardiopulmonary bypassInferior vena cavaInternal medicineAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The outcome of surgical repair of sinus venosus atrial septal defect was reviewed retrospectively. The operation was performed on 44 children aged 8 to 163 months, between April 1985 and November 1998. Median cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic crossclamp times were 58 minutes (range, 29 to 141 minutes) and 29 minutes (range, 4 to 67 minutes), respectively. Use of blood products decreased from 4.5 units per patient in the first period (1985 to 1989) to 0.6 units in the last period (1995 to 1998). Median intensive care and hospital stays were 2 days (range, 1 to 12 days) and 6 days (range, 4 to 16 days), respectively. There was 1 early death (2.3%). Complications included reexploration for bleeding in 2 patients (4.5%) and for superior vena cava obstruction in 1 (2.3%), and arrhythmias in 3 (6.8%), which required a pacemaker in one. During follow-up of 15 to 176 months, 83.8% of patients were in sinus rhythm. One required angioplasty for superior vena cava stenosis, hemodynamically insignificant residual shunt was found in 3, and mild superior vena cava stenosis in 3. Repair of sinus venosus atrial septal defect carries a low mortality and morbidity, but long-term follow-up is needed to monitor potential sinus node dysfunction and superior vena cava stenosis.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.008
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.301
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Cardiovascular and Thoracic AnnalsSame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207