MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067101327 · doi:10.1002/mus.23538

Cardiac screening investigations in adult‐onset progressive external ophthalmoplegia patients

2012· review· en· W2067101327 on OpenAlexafffund
Gerald Pfeffer, Michelle M. Mezei

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Eye Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineCardiomyopathyMitochondrial myopathyExternal ophthalmoplegiaCardiologyInternal medicineMyopathyElectrocardiographyRestrictive cardiomyopathyPediatricsHeart failureMitochondrial DNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Patients with mitochondrial myopathies may develop cardiac complications such as cardiomyopathy and/or cardiac conduction defects. To identify these potentially life-threatening and treatable conditions, it is common practice to screen patients intermittently with electrocardiography and echocardiography. The optimal time interval for such screening investigations is unknown. We developed this study to review our screening results in adult-onset patients with progressive external ophthalmoplegia (PEO). METHODS: This study was a retrospective review of PEO patients with 5 years or more of cardiac screening investigations who did not have any cardiac symptoms. RESULTS: Fifteen patients were included, and cardiomyopathy was identified on screening echocardiogram in 1 patient. Four patients had other abnormalities identified, which were unrelated to their mitochondrial myopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Only 1 patient in 15 developed cardiac complications related to mitochondrial disease during 5 years of follow-up. We suggest that a screening interval of 3-5 years is probably appropriate for adult-onset PEO patients who do not have cardiac symptoms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicOphthalmology and Eye DisordersFrench-language works237,207