MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Atrial Resynchronization Following Heart Transplantation in Childhood

2009· article· en· W1995433096 on OpenAlexaff
Julia Cadrin‐Tourigny, A Fournier, Paul Khairy, Suzanne Vobecky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cardiovascular Electrophysiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineUniversité de MontréalHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiac resynchronization therapyChronotropicCardiologyInternal medicineHeart failureHeart transplantationTransplantationCardiac function curveHeart rateBlood pressureEjection fraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite preserved left ventricular function, exercise capacity is often impaired after cardiac transplantation due to autonomic denervation of the donor's sinus node. We present our experience with atrio-atrial resynchronization in 2 pediatric heart transplant recipients. Both were highly active, suffered from chronotropic incompetence, and underwent successful atrial resynchronization with an objective improvement in exercise capacity, restoration of a physiologic chronotropic response, and resolution of dyspnea. Long-term stable recipient sinus node function may, therefore, be maintained in some cardiac transplant recipients with standard atrio-atrial anastomes. Atrio-atrial pacing may be feasible and effective years after transplantation.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cardiovascular ElectrophysiologySame topicTransplantation: Methods and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207