MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023225517 · doi:10.1159/000110558

Management of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure: Renal Implications

2008· review· en· W2023225517 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood Purification · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcute decompensated heart failureIntensive care medicineDecompensationHeart failureModalitiesRenal functionPopulationDiseaseKidney diseaseManagement of heart failureClinical trialCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart failure (HF) is a chronic disease process associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Hospitalizations for acute decompensation may be frequent and herald a downward trajectory for the underlying disease state and overall poor prognosis for the patient. While significant advances have been made in the realm of chronic HF management, clinicians continue to grapple with optimal strategies to treat acutely decompensated patients, in part due to a paucity of clinical trials in this area. There is now an increasing awareness of the complex interplay that occurs between the heart and kidneys among patients with HF. As such, many of the traditional and emerging therapeutic modalities used to treat this patient population can significantly alter renal function. This review will focus on state-of-the-art management of acute decompensated HF with specific reference to the impact of currently available therapies on renal outcomes.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.291 · 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