MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048887050 · doi:10.1051/medsci/20072311950

Flux dans l’isthme aortique foetal

2007· article· fr· W2048887050 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Claude Fouron

Bibliographic record

Venuemédecine/sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nouveau concept physiologique : la disposition en parallèle des ventricules foetaux et de leur voie de sortie artérielle est incompatible avec l’idée de considérer le canal artériel comme un shunt. Seul l’isthme aortique établit une communication entre les deux arches foetales, l’aortique et la pulmonaire. La faible résistance placentaire explique la présence dans des conditions physiologiques normales d’un flux antérograde dans l’isthme tant en systole qu’en diastole. Potentiels cliniques : (1) les courbes de vélocités sanguines dans l’isthme foetal varient en fonction de la performance individuelle de chaque ventricule : le VG cause un flux antérograde alors que normalement l’influence du VD sur le flux isthmique est rétrograde ; (2) toute modification du flux ou des résistances périphériques dans l’une des deux circulations artérielles foetales disposées en parallèle devrait se répercuter sur le volume et l’orientation du flux dans l’isthme aortique ; c’est le cas des fistules artério-veineuses périphériques ou de l’augmentation de la résistance vasculaire placentaire menant à un retard de croissance intra-utérin. Conclusion : l’enregistrement au Doppler du flux dans l’isthme aortique permet : (1) une évaluation globale de l’état cardio-circulatoire foetal ; (2) reflète l’équilibre des performances de chacun des ventricules ; (3) est un élément important pour l’étude des conséquences hémodynamiques des anomalies de la circulation périphérique.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.345
Teacher spread0.313 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemédecine/sciencesSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207