MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160923097 · doi:10.1586/erc.09.179

Pregnant women with congenital heart disease: cardiac, anesthetic and obstetrical implications

2010· review· en· W2160923097 on OpenAlexaff
Susan M. Fernandes, Katherine W. Arendt, Michael J. Landzberg, Katherine E. Economy, Paul Khairy

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart diseasePregnancyDiseasePediatricsIntensive care medicineCongenital malformationsCardiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remarkable advances in surgical and clinical management have resulted in survival to adulthood in the large majority of patients with congenital heart malformations, even with the most complex disease. Over 1 million adults with congenital heart disease currently live in the USA, approximately half of whom are women of childbearing age. Collectively, congenital malformations are the most common form of heart disease in pregnant women. Indeed, in North America, congenital defects are now the leading cause of maternal morbidity and mortality from heart disease. This article begins with a summary of cardiovascular changes during pregnancy and highlights key features in pre-pregnancy counseling, maternal cardiac and obstetric risk, and neonatal complications. Management issues regarding pregnancy and delivery are elaborated, including anesthesia considerations. While it is beyond the scope of this article to discuss particulars related to all forms of congenital heart disease, selected subtypes are detailed at greater length. In the absence of clinical trial evidence to inform the care of pregnant women with congenital heart disease, this article is inspired by the premise that knowledgeable multidisciplinary assessment and management provides the best opportunity to substantially improve outcomes for mother and baby.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations59
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207