MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097902184 · doi:10.1093/ejechocard/jeq175

Left atrial function: physiology, assessment, and clinical implications

2011· review· en· W2097902184 on OpenAlexaff
Gustavo Gavazzoni Blume, Christopher J. McLeod, Marion E. Barnes, J B Seward, Patricia A. Pellikka, Paul M. Bastiansen, Teresa S.M. Tsang

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Echocardiography · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCardiologyCardiac imagingHeart failureStroke (engine)BiomarkerIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The interest in the left atrium (LA) has resurged over the recent years. In the early 1980s, multiple studies were conducted to determine the normal values of LA size. Over the past decade, LA size as an imaging biomarker has been consistently shown to be a powerful predictor of outcomes, including major public health problems such as atrial fibrillation, heart failure, stroke, and death. More recently, functional assessment of the LA has been shown to be, at least as, if not more robust, a marker of cardiovascular outcomes. Current available data suggest that the combined evaluation of LA size and LA function will augment prognostication. The aim of this review is to provide a critical appraisal of current echocardiographic techniques for the assessment of LA function and the implications of such assessment for prediction and disease prevention.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 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

Citations523
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of EchocardiographySame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207