MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016644911 · doi:10.5339/gcsp.2014.11

The living aortic valve: From molecules to function

2014· review· en· W2016644911 on OpenAlexaff
Adrian H. Chester, Ismaı̈l El-Hamamsy, Jonathan T. Butcher, Najma Latif, Sérgio Bertazzo, Magdi H. Yacoub

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Cardiology Science and Practice · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsAortic valveMedicineHeart valveCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aortic valve lies in a unique hemodynamic environment, one characterized by a range of stresses (shear stress, bending forces, loading forces and strain) that vary in intensity and direction throughout the cardiac cycle. Yet, despite its changing environment, the aortic valve opens and closes over 100,000 times a day and, in the majority of human beings, will function normally over a lifespan of 70-90 years. Until relatively recently heart valves were considered passive structures that play no active role in the functioning of a valve, or in the maintenance of its integrity and durability. However, through clinical experience and basic research the aortic valve can now be characterized as a living, dynamic organ with the capacity to adapt to its complex mechanical and biomechanical environment through active and passive communication between its constituent parts. The clinical relevance of a living valve substitute in patients requiring aortic valve replacement has been confirmed. This highlights the importance of using tissue engineering to develop heart valve substitutes containing living cells which have the ability to assume the complex functioning of the native valve.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.393 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations99
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Cardiology Science and PracticeSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207