Functional Classification of Pulmonary Hypertension in Children: Report from the PVRI Pediatric Taskforce, Panama 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The members of the Pediatric Task Force of the Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute (PVRI) were aware of the need to develop a functional classification of pulmonary hypertension in children. The proposed classification follows the same pattern and uses the same criteria as the Dana Point pulmonary hypertension specific classification for adults. Modifications were necessary for children, since age, physical growth and maturation influences the way in which the functional effects of a disease are expressed. It is essential to encapsulate a child's clinical status, to make it possible to review progress with time as he/she grows up, as consistently and as objectively as possible. Particularly in younger children we sought to include objective indicators such as thriving, need for supplemental feeds and the record of school or nursery attendance. This helps monitor the clinical course of events and response to treatment over the years. It also facilitates the development of treatment algorithms for children. We present a consensus paper on a functional classification system for children with pulmonary hypertension, discussed at the Annual Meeting of the PVRI in Panama City, February 2011.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".