MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126277107 · doi:10.1093/ejechocard/jer157

Assessment of the American Society of Echocardiography-European Association of Echocardiography guidelines for diastolic function in patients with depressed ejection fraction: an echocardiographic and invasive haemodynamic study

2011· article· en· W2126277107 on OpenAlexaff
Hisham Dokainish, John Nguyen, Jan Bobek, Rajiv Goswami, Nasser Lakkis

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Echocardiography · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionInternal medicineCardiologyDiastoleDoppler echocardiographyPulmonary arteryCardiac catheterizationHemodynamicsPulmonary wedge pressureBlood pressureHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: There is controversy surrounding the accuracy of echo-Doppler variables, including early mitral inflow/mitral annular velocity (E/e'), for estimating left ventricular filling pressure (LVFP) in patients with depressed ejection fraction (EF < 50%). METHODS AND RESULTS: The American Society of Echocardiography-European Association of Echocardiography (ASE-EAE) algorithm for diastolic function in depressed LVEF was retrospectively applied to a database of patients who underwent echocardiography ≤20 min of cardiac catheterization. LV pre-atrial contraction pressure (pre-A) ≥15 mmHg was elevated. Of 62 patients studied, the mean age was 53.6 ± 10.6 years and the mean LVEF was 27.2 ± 11.8%. The correlations of E/e' (R = 0.43, P = 0.0005) and E (R = 0.39, P = 0.002) with LV pre-A were modest, compared with pulmonary artery pressure (PAP, R = 0.69, P = 0.0006), E/late mitral (A) velocity (R = 0.52, P < 0.0001), and mitral deceleration time (DT, R = -0.51, P < 0.0001). Using the ASE-ESE algorithm starting with E/A, E, and DT, 54 of 62 patients were accurately classified to predict LV pre-A >15 or <15 mmHg (sensitivity = 84%, specificity = 80%, area under the curve = 0.86, P < 0.001). The 6 of 6 patients with E/A < 1 and E < 50 and the 14 of 15 (93%) patients with E/A> 2 and DT < 150 were correctly classified as having normal and elevated LVFP, respectively, while 34 of 41 (83%) patients with E/A = 1-2 or E/A<1 and E>50 cm/s were correctly classified using the addition of E/e' and PAP. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study shows that in this population with depressed LVEF, no single echo-Doppler variable had high accuracy for predicting LV pre-A ≥15 mmHg. However, the ASE-EAE algorithm using multiple variables predicted LVFP with good accuracy, superior to any single echo-Doppler variable alone.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations75
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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