Evaluation of left atrial contraction contribution to left ventricular filling using cardiovascular magnetic resonance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe a new method to quantify the left atrial contraction contribution (ACC) to left ventricular (LV) filling using cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We assessed 120 normal subjects (50% female) using steady-state free precession CMR volumetry. Volumes measurements were performed using short axis and rotational long axis views. The percentage of ACC was calculated by dividing the LV filling volume resulting from left atrial (LA) contraction by the LV stroke volume (LVSV). RESULTS: The described method was well reproducible. The ACC in normal subjects was 15 ± 5% for ages <40 years, 28 ± 8% for ages 40 to 55 years, and 38 ± 5% for ages >55 years. When adjusted for age, ie, dividing the ACC percentage by age, a value between 0.4 and 0.7 was found to represent the normal range of ACC at any age. CONCLUSION: The study presents a new and accurate CMR volumetric method to quantify ACC to LV filling. ACC ranges from 10%-40%, depending on age.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".