Aortic Stenosis and Systemic Hypertension, Modeling of
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aortic stenosis is the most common cardiovascular disease after systemic hypertension and coronary artery disease in developed countries. It induces an obstruction to blood flow from the left ventricle to the aorta resulting in an increase in left ventricular afterload. More than 30% of patients with aortic stenosis have concomitant systemic hypertension. In such patients, the left ventricle faces a double pressure overload (valvular and vascular). A detailed understanding of the respective impacts of aortic stenosis and hypertension on left ventricular function would help to better predict whether aortic valve replacement and/or antihypertensive medical treatment would be beneficial. To better understand how coexisting aortic stenosis and hypertension affect the left ventricular function, we developed a relatively simple mathematical cardiovascular model to simulate the ventricular‐valvular‐vascular hemodynamic interaction(V 3 model). The present chapter provides a detailed description of the V 3 model along with numerical findings as well as their clinical implications. Several simulations with the V 3 model were performed to describe the effect of aortic stenosis on left ventricular stroke work and show the effect of coexistent systemic hypertension. Our simulations demonstrated that mild or moderate aortic stenosis has a small impact on left ventricular stroke work, whereas the latter increases noticeably when aortic stenosis becomes severe. They also showed that even mild hypertension may greatly influence left ventricular stroke work in patients with aortic stenosis. The mathematical V 3 model thus provides a potentially useful tool to investigate complex cardiovascular interactions that could be of great clinical interest.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it