The nomenclature, definition and classification of discordant atrioventricular connections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the process of creation of a bidirectional crossmap between the system emerging, on the one hand, from the initiative sponsored by the Congenital Heart Committees of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons, and on the other hand, from that formulated by the Coding Committee of the European Association for Pediatric Cardiology, the Nomenclature Working Group has successfully created the International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code. As would be expected, during the process of crossmapping it became clear that, for most lesions, the European Pediatric Cardiac Code was more complete in its description of the diagnoses, while the International Congenital Heart Surgery Nomenclature and Database Project was more complete in its description of the procedures. This process of crossmapping exemplifies the efforts of the Nomenclature Working Group to create a comprehensive and all-inclusive international system for the naming of paediatric and congenital cardiac disease, the International Pediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code. Although names and classification for paediatric and congenital cardiac disease will continue to evolve over time, we are now closer than ever to reaching uniform international agreement and standardization. The International Paediatric and Congenital Cardiac Code can be downloaded from the Internet, free of charge, at www.ipccc. net.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".