MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004338677 · doi:10.1177/2150135113519455

Linking the Congenital Heart Surgery Databases of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons and the Congenital Heart Surgeons’ Society

2014· article· en· W2004338677 on OpenAlexaff
Jeffrey P. Jacobs, Sara K. Pasquali, Erle H. Austin, J. William Gaynor, Carl L. Backer, Jennifer C. Hirsch‐Romano, William G. Williams, Christopher A. Caldarone, Brian W. McCrindle, Karen E. Graham, Rachel S. Dokholyan, Gregory J. Shook, Jennifer Poteat, Maulik V. Baxi, Tara Karamlou, Eugene H. Blackstone, Constantine Mavroudis, John E. Mayer, Richard A. Jonas, Marshall L. Jacobs

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal for Pediatric and Congenital Heart Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineGeneralizability theoryCardiac surgeryCohortPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: A link has been created between the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database (STS-CHSD) and the Congenital Heart Surgeons' Society Database (CHSS-D). Five matrices have been created that facilitate the automated identification of patients who are potentially eligible for the five active CHSS studies using the STS-CHSD. These matrices are now used to (1) estimate the denominator of patients eligible for CHSS studies and (2) compare "eligible and enrolled patients" to "potentially eligible and not enrolled patients" to assess the generalizability of CHSS studies. METHODS: The matrices were applied to 40 consenting institutions that participate in both the STS-CHSD and the CHSS to (1) estimate the denominator of patients that are potentially eligible for CHSS studies, (2) estimate the completeness of enrollment of patients eligible for CHSS studies among all CHSS sites, (3) estimate the completeness of enrollment of patients eligible for CHSS studies among those CHSS institutions participating in each CHSS cohort study, and (4) compare "eligible and enrolled patients" to "potentially eligible and not enrolled patients" to assess the generalizability of CHSS studies. The matrices were applied to all participants in the STS-CHSD to identify patients who underwent frequently performed operations and compare "eligible and enrolled patients" to "potentially eligible and not enrolled patients" in following five domains: (1) age at surgery, (2) gender, (3) race, (4) discharge mortality, and (5) postoperative length of stay. Completeness of enrollment was defined as the number of actually enrolled patients divided by the number of patients identified as being potentially eligible for enrollment. RESULTS: For the CHSS Critical Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Study (LVOTO) study, for the Norwood procedure, completeness of enrollment at centers actively participating in the LVOTO study was 34%. For the Norwood operation, discharge mortality was 15% among 227 enrolled patients and 16% among 1768 nonenrolled potentially eligible patients from the 40 consenting institutions. Median postoperative length of stay was 31 days and 26 days for these enrolled and nonenrolled patients. For the CHSS anomalous aortic origin of a coronary artery (AAOCA) study, for AAOCA repair, completeness of enrollment at centers actively participating in the AAOCA study was 40%. CONCLUSION: Determination of the denominator of patients eligible for CHSS studies and comparison of "eligible and enrolled patients" to "potentially eligible and not enrolled patients" provides an estimate of the extent to which patients in CHSS studies are representative of the overall population of eligible patients; however, opportunities exist to improve enrollment.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.296
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal for Pediatric and Congenital Heart SurgerySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207