MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145653211 · doi:10.1186/s13089-015-0022-8

Can severe aortic stenosis be identified by emergency physicians when interpreting a simplified two-view echocardiogram obtained by trained echocardiographers?

2015· article· en· W2145653211 on OpenAlexafffund
Hasan Alzahrani, Michael Y. Woo, Chris Johnson, Paul Pageau, Scott J. Millington, Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Ultrasound Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Association of Emergency Physicians
KeywordsMedicineParasternal lineStenosisCardiologyInternal medicineBicuspid aortic valveRadiologyKappa

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common valve problem that causes significant morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study was to determine whether an emergency physician (EP) could determine severe AS by reviewing only two B-mode echocardiographic views (parasternal long axis (PSLA) and parasternal short axis (PSSA)) obtained by trained echocardiographers. METHODS: A convenience sample of 60 patients with no AS, mild/moderate AS or severe AS was selected for health record and echocardiogram review. The echocardiograms were performed in an accredited echocardiography laboratory. An EP blinded to the cardiologist's final report reviewed the PSLA and PSSA views after the cases were randomly sorted. Severe AS was defined as no cusp movement seen by the EP reviewers. A second EP independently reviewed 25% of randomly selected patients for inter-rater reliability. Collected data included patient demographics, EP interpretation and details of each echo view (quality, the number of cusps visualized, presence of calcification) and compared to final cardiology reports. Analyses included descriptive statistics, test characteristics for severe AS and kappa for agreement. RESULTS: The mean age was 75.3 years (range 18 to 90) with 36.7% females. The cardiologist's diagnosis was as follows: 38.3% severe AS, 28.3% mild/moderate AS and 33.3% no AS. The PSSA view was poorer in quality compared with the PSLA (33.3% vs. 13.3%, p = 0.02), but the PSSA view was better than PSLA to visualize all three cusps (83.3% vs. 0%, p = 0.001). There was no difference in the presence of calcification between the mild/moderate and severe AS groups (94.1% vs. 100.0%, p = 0.46). The sensitivity and specificity for EP diagnosis of severe AS was 75.0% (95% CI 56.7% to 85.4%) and 92.5% (83.3% to 97.7%). The kappa for severe AS was 0.69 (0.41 to 0.85), and there was no significant difference between observers in the quality of the view, presence of aortic calcification and the number of cusps visible. CONCLUSIONS: PSLA and PSSA views obtained by trained echocardiographers can be interpreted by an EP with appropriate training to identify severe AS with good specificity. Further larger prospective studies are required before widespread use by EPs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Ultrasound JournalSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207