Ventricular interaction: from bench to bedside
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Decreased right ventricle (RV) output results in decreased left ventricle end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and output by series interaction. Direct ventricular interaction may also have a major effect on LV function. Thus, decreased LVEDV caused by reduced RV output may be further reduced by a leftward septal shift and pericardial constraint. This has been shown to be true in acute and chronic pulmonary hypertension and is now also apparent in severe congestive heart failure. The use of intracavitary LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP) to assess LVEDV is inappropriate if pressure surrounding the LV is increased: the surrounding pressure should be subtracted from LVEDP to calculate the effective distending (transmural) pressure which governs preload. If the surrounding pressure increases more than LVEDP, transmural LVEDP and LVEDV will decrease despite the increased LVEDP. Thus, the use of filling pressure to reflect changes in LVEDV has led to erroneous conclusions regarding changes in myocardial compliance and contractility. It is now clear that volume loading may reduce LVEDV and stroke work in pulmonary embolism, chronic lung disease and severe congestive heart failure despite increased LVEDP. The decreased stroke work is a result of reduced LV preload, not decreased contractility as would be suggested if filling pressure is used to reflect preload.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.009 |
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".