MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028791053 · doi:10.2174/157340309789317878

Surgical Ventricular Restoration: An Operation To Reverse Remodeling - The Basic Science (Part I)

2009· article· en· W2028791053 on OpenAlexaff
Ganesh Shanmugam, Imtiaz S. Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Cardiology Reviews · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Structural Anomalies and Repair
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureVentricular functionVentricular remodelingSurgical proceduresMedical therapyIntensive care medicineCardiologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Congestive heart failure as a consequence of ischemic heart disease is an increasing medical problem. Notwithstanding the huge advances in the medical and conventional surgical management of heart failure, eventual outcomes remain suboptimal. This 2 part article outlines the magnitude of the problem, the limitations of conventional therapies as they exist, and the use of newer procedures that directly address the restoration of ventricular pump function.The first part of the article deals with the pathology of different facets of the remodeling process, and the unique anatomy, geometry and flow dynamics as they pertain to ventricular function in the normal as well as the failing heart. It then details the limitations of conventional therapy, thereby laying the basis for the need and evolution of newer surgical procedures and ends with the selection of patients for ventricular restoration procedures and the pitfalls in the choice of patients for such newer techniques.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Cardiology ReviewsSame topicCardiac Structural Anomalies and RepairFrench-language works237,207