MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099081626 · doi:10.1152/ajpheart.01154.2007

Toward a noninvasive subject-specific estimation of abdominal aortic pressure

2008· article· en· W2099081626 on OpenAlexaff
Carl‐Johan Thore, Jonas Stålhand, Matts Karlsson

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsEngineering Link (Canada)
FundersLinköpings Universitet
KeywordsSubject (documents)Abdominal aortic aneurysmCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineComputer scienceRadiologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for estimation of central arterial pressure based on linear one-dimensional wave propagation theory is presented in this paper. The equations are applied to a distributed model of the arterial tree, truncated by three-element windkessels. To reflect individual differences in the properties of the arterial trees, we pose a minimization problem from which individual parameters are identified. The idea is to take a measured waveform in a peripheral artery and use it as input to the model. The model subsequently predicts the corresponding waveform in another peripheral artery in which a measurement has also been made, and the arterial tree model is then calibrated in such a way that the computed waveform matches its measured counterpart. For the purpose of validation, invasively recorded abdominal aortic, brachial, and femoral pressures in nine healthy subjects are used. The results show that the proposed method estimates the abdominal aortic pressure wave with good accuracy. The root mean square error (RMSE) of the estimated waveforms was 1.61 +/- 0.73 mmHg, whereas the errors in systolic and pulse pressure were 2.32 +/- 1.74 and 3.73 +/- 2.04 mmHg, respectively. These results are compared with another recently proposed method based on a signal processing technique, and it is shown that our method yields a significantly (P < 0.01) lower RMSE. With more extensive validation, the method may eventually be used in clinical practice to provide detailed, almost individual, specific information as a valuable basis for decision making.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory PhysiologySame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207