Left Ventricular Diastolic Mechanical Dyssynchrony and Associated Clinical Outcomes in Children With Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We investigated diastolic mechanical dyssynchrony and its relation to clinical status in pediatric dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). METHODS AND RESULTS: We calculated a diastolic and systolic dyssynchrony index (standard deviation of time to peak tissue early diastolic/systolic velocity in 12 left ventricular segments) in 33 children with DCM and 46 control subjects. A threshold to diagnose diastolic dyssynchrony was determined, and cardiac function and clinical outcomes were compared between DCM patients with and without diastolic dyssynchrony. Left ventricular wall motion was more synchronized in diastole than in systole. The diastolic dyssynchrony index was significantly higher in children with DCM than in control subjects (28.1+/-18.1 versus 9.1+/-3.8 ms, P<0.0001). A 17-ms threshold indicated the presence of diastolic dyssynchrony. Patients who died or underwent transplantation had greater diastolic dyssynchrony (diastolic dyssynchrony index 37.9+/-20.5 versus 22.1+/-13.8 ms, P=0.01), and the rate of transplant-free survival appeared to be worse for DCM patients with diastolic dyssynchrony than for patients with synchronous DCM (hazard ratio 2.98, P=0.11; hazard ratio adjusted for disease duration 2.95, P=0.17). CONCLUSIONS: Left ventricular diastolic mechanical dyssynchrony is common in pediatric DCM, especially in patients who subsequently experience transplantation or death, and may be associated with a decreased length of transplantation-free survival.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".