MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138294244 · doi:10.1017/s1047951104006389

Indications, criterions, and principles for biventricular repair

2004· article· en· W2138294244 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christo I. Tchervenkov

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology in the Young · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHypoplastic left heart syndromeMedicineHypoplasiaCardiologyInternal medicineVentricleNorwood procedureHeart disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hypoplastic left heart syndrome constitutes a wide spectrum of cardiac malformations, characterized by varying degrees of underdevelopment of the structures of the left heart and aortic arch. At the severe end of the spectrum, there is aortic and mitral atresia, and the left ventricle is vestigial. In contrast, at the mild end, there is hypoplasia of the left ventricle in the absence of overt stenosis of either the aortic or mitral valves, the combination we have described as hypoplastic left heart complex. 1 Until recently, debate with regard to the optimal surgical approach has centered on the choice between the Norwood operation and neonatal cardiac transplantation. In the last several years, nonetheless, it has been shown that of biventricular repair can be achieved in those patients at the favorable end of the spectrum that we designated as having the complex rather than the syndrome. 1 , 2 It is well recognized that an ongoing difficulty is the inconsistent and imprecise definition of hypoplastic left heart syndrome. In this presentation, I summarize our own criterions, and our principles for biventricular repair, as based on our experience at the Montreal Children's Hospital, for those patients we judge to have the hypoplastic left heart complex.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology in the YoungSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207