Editor's Choice – Treatment Decisions for Descending Thoracic Aneurysm: Preferences for Thoracic Endovascular Aneurysm Repair or Surveillance in a Discrete Choice Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate and rank factors that influence endovascular treatment decisions by specialists for patients with descending thoracic aortic aneurysm (dTAA). METHODS: Specialists completed a diagrammatic survey describing uncertainty about the benefit of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) for dTAA with respect to age, sex, and aneurysm diameter. Subsequently, a detailed discrete choice experiment was designed. Specialists were recruited and asked to indicate treatment their preference (TEVAR or surveillance) in 25 hypothetical cases of dTAA, with variable patient attributes: age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, aneurysm diameter, adequate landing zone distal to left subclavian artery (LSA), and length of aortic coverage. Data were analysed using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: The diagrammatic survey, based on 50 respondents, showed that uncertainty about the benefits of TEVAR was greatest for patients aged 80-85 years (up to 47% of respondents were "unsure") and that uncertainty increased with increasing aneurysm diameter (for an 80-year-old man, 7% were unsure at 5.5 cm and 33% were unsure at 7.0 cm). Seventy-one specialists (mainly from Europe and North America, 86% vascular surgeons and 98% working in units offering TEVAR) completed the discrete choice experiment. Preference for TEVAR increased greatly with enlarging diameter: adjusted odds ratios (OR) >5.5-6.0 cm = 15.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 9.83-25.40); >6.0-6.5 cm = 393.0 (95% CI 202.00-766.00); >6.5-7.0 cm = 1829.0 (95% CI 400.00-4,181.00). TEVAR was less likely to be preferred in patients older than 75 years (>75-80 years OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21-0.49; >80-85 years = 0.18, 95% CI 0.11-0.28); in women (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.37-0.74); in patients classified as ASA grade 4 (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.36-0.57); and in patients with aorta coverage >25 cm (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32-0.74). The proximal landing zone did not influence preference. CONCLUSION: Specialists' preferences for endovascular repair of degenerative dTAA vary widely, and demonstrate clinical uncertainty, especially in octogenarians, and a reluctance to offer TEVAR to women. Aneurysm diameter dominates treatment preferences, but patient fitness and length of aortic coverage (>25 cm) also were influential, although the landing zone distal to LSA was not.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.082 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".