The Alberta Heart Failure Etiology and Analysis Research Team (HEART) study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nationally, symptomatic heart failure affects 1.5-2% of Canadians, incurs $3 billion in hospital costs annually and the global burden is expected to double in the next 1-2 decades. The current one-year mortality rate after diagnosis of heart failure remains high at >25%. Consequently, new therapeutic strategies need to be developed for this debilitating condition. METHODS/DESIGN: The objective of the Alberta HEART program (http://albertaheartresearch.ca) is to develop novel diagnostic, therapeutic and prognostic approaches to patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. We hypothesize that novel imaging techniques and biomarkers will aid in describing heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Furthermore, the development of new diagnostic criteria will allow us to: 1) better define risk factors associated with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; 2) elucidate clinical, cellular and molecular mechanisms involved with the development and progression of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; 3) design and test new therapeutic strategies for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Additionally, Alberta HEART provides training and education for enhancing translational medicine, knowledge translation and clinical practice in heart failure. This is a prospective observational cohort study of patients with, or at risk for, heart failure. Patients will have sequential testing including quality of life and clinical outcomes over 12 months. After that time, study participants will be passively followed via linkage to external administrative databases. Clinical outcomes of interest include death, hospitalization, emergency department visits, physician resource use and/or heart transplant. Patients will be followed for a total of 5 years. DISCUSSION: Alberta HEART has the primary objective to define new diagnostic criteria for patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. New criteria will allow for targeted therapies, diagnostic tests and further understanding of the patients, both at-risk for and with heart failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02052804.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".