MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062960014 · doi:10.1586/14779072.2014.916615

Expanding indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement

2014· review· en· W2062960014 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Maluenda, Danny Dvir

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineValve replacementStenosisAortic valve stenosisAortic valveCardiologyAortic valve replacementSurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as an accepted indication for non-operable patients with severe symptomatic native aortic valve stenosis (AS) and as a reasonable alternative for high-risk surgical AS patients. Nonetheless, the safety and efficacy of performing TAVR in several other potential indications are yet unclear. In the present manuscript the authors review the current evidence supporting TAVR for other potential indications than the typical high-risk/non-operable AS patients, providing updated results of the main clinical trials and registries exploring these particular indications. Finally, the authors provide practical recommendations for TAVR in each of these conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.067
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207