MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152546572 · doi:10.1017/s1047951100012932

Cineangiographic aortic dimensions in normal children

2002· article· en· W2152546572 on OpenAlexaff
Kalyani R. Trivedi, Jorge Pinzon, Brian W. McCrindle, Patricia E. Burrows, Robert M. Freedom, Lee Benson

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology in the Young · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyAortic archInternal medicineStenosisAscending aortaAortaDescending aortaThoracic aortaHemodynamicsBody surface areaRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge of normal aortic dimensions is important in the management of children with aortic disease. So as to define such dimensions, we undertook a retrospective review of clinical data and aortic cineangiograms from 167 subjects without aortic disease having a mean age of 3.67 years, with a range from 0.01 to 14.95 years. Amongst the patients, 56 were without detectable cardiac lesions, 66 patients had mild pulmonary stenosis, 30 were seen with Kawasaki disease, and 15 with small interatrial defects within the oval fossa. Aortograms were available in all. No patient had any hemodynamic derangement that would have affected the aorta during intrauterine life or childhood. Systolic dimensions were measured in the ascending and descending aorta at the level of the carina, at the transverse aortic arch distal to the brachiocephalic, of the left common carotid artery at its origin, at the transverse aortic arch distal to the left common carotid artery, at the aortic isthmus, and of the aorta at the level of the diaphragm. A regression analysis model was used to establish the range of predicted normal values, with their confidence limits, standardizing the values to height as the biophysical parameter having the highest correlation to aortic dimensions. Normal ranges were established for all the levels of measurement. The data should prove useful in identifying abnormalities of the thoracic aorta during childhood, and when assessing the outcomes of interventions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations6
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology in the YoungSame topicAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesFrench-language works237,207