MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099170457 · doi:10.1586/17434440.2.2.137

Use of the MicroMed<sup>®</sup>DeBakey VAD<sup>®</sup>for the treatment of end-stage heart failure

2005· review· en· W2099170457 on OpenAlexaff
Michael E. DeBakey, Edward R. Teitel

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Medical Devices · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsMicrosemi (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDestination therapyHeart failureIntensive care medicineHeart transplantationVentricular assist deviceEconomic shortageCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Congestive heart failure poses a serious health risk to millions of Americans. Medical therapy for advanced stages of this condition has offered a minimal benefit and surgical treatment through transplantation is limited by the donor organ shortage. Although left ventricular assist devices may represent the future of therapy for this disease, the first generation of these pumps are limited by a number of factors that restrict their use to only the sickest of patients. The development and clinical use of the MicroMed DeBakey VAD represents a paradigm shift in the field of heart disease, supporting the notion that mechanical assistance can be achieved with continuous flow pumps. Axial flow devices, such as the DeBakey VAD, may open new doors for smaller patients and children, as well as improve the current standard of care for adults who require long-term circulatory support.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Medical DevicesSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207