SCAI expert consensus statement for advanced training programs in pediatric and congenital interventional cardiac catheterization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric and Congenital Interventional Cardiology is the practice of catheter-based techniques that improve cardiac physiology and circulation through the treatment of heart disease in children and adults with congenital or acquired heart defects. Over the last decade, and since last published training guidelines for pediatric cardiac catheterization and interventional cardiology were published in 2005 [1] the field of Pediatric and Congenital Cardiac Catheterization has evolved into a predominantly interventional discipline. As there is no sub-specialty certification for interventional cardiac catheterization in pediatrics, the Congenital Heart Disease Committee of the Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions has put together this consensus statement for advanced training in pediatric and congenital interventional cardiac catheterization. The statement puts forth recommendations for program infrastructure in terms of teaching, personnel, equipment, facilities, conferences, patient volume and trainee assessment. This is meant to set a standard for training programs as well as giving applicants a basis on which to judge and compare programs.
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 | 0.017 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.010 |
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".