Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have gained considerable insight and understanding about the etiology, embryogenesis of the myocardium, genetic background, diagnosis and outcome of left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC) over the last 2 decades. LVNC has a distinct morphological appearance with a thickened, two-layered myocardium consisting of an epicardial compacted and a thicker endocardial non-compacted layer. These features make the recognition with non-invasive imaging modalities highly feasible. We now recognize LVNC is a distinct phenotype of the myocardium with genetic heterogeneity. In several cases, LVNC shares a common genetic background with other forms of cardiomyopathy. Therefore, most likely it is not a distinct form of cardiomyopathy but rather a morphological expression of different diseases. LVNC can present as an isolated condition or associated with congenital heart disease, neuromuscular disease or genetic syndromes. It may be sporadic or a familial disease, with an autosomal dominant or X-linked mode of transmission. The clinical features associated with LVNC vary from asymptomatic individuals diagnosed during screening to symptomatic patients, with the potential for heart failure, arrhythmias, thromboembolic events, and sudden cardiac death. A comprehensive diagnostic approach includes clinical history, electrocardiogram, imaging (in many instances with more than one technique), genetic assessment, and screening of first-degree relatives. This increases the chances of instituting the most appropriate therapy. Therapy for the most part is very similar to the general heart failure population with the exception that anticoagulation is started at a lower threshold.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".