MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113480841 · doi:10.1097/anc.0b013e3181fc7c5d

Parental Decision Making Regarding Treatment of Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome

2010· article· en· W2113480841 on OpenAlex
Marcia K. Ellinger, Gwen R. Rempel

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Neonatal Care · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaAlberta HealthAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypoplastic left heart syndromeMedicinePalliative carePediatricsNorwood procedureIntensive care medicineHeart defectHeart diseaseNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parents of children diagnosed with a complex congenital heart anomaly such as hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) are faced with the challenge of choosing the best treatment option for their children. Parents must decide among options of compassionate care, palliative reconstructive surgery, or neonatal cardiac transplantation, and additionally with antenatal diagnosis must decide regarding continuation of pregnancy. With improved survival rates yet persistent morbidities following the Norwood surgical approach for HLHS, controversy remains whether parents should be counseled on all treatment options as evidenced by research that articulates the varied opinions of health care providers. The parents' perspective is less well researched. In this study, interview data from parents who chose the Norwood-Sano surgical option were analyzed to provide insight into the various treatment options they were given following diagnosis of HLHS in their children and how they came to choose the surgical palliation option.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.302 · 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