MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161987939 · doi:10.1586/14779072.3.2.295

Bicuspid aortic valve disease: recent insights in pathophysiology and treatment

2005· review· en· W2161987939 on OpenAlexaff
Paul W.M. Fedak, Tirone E. David, Michael A. Borger, Subodh Verma, Jagdish Butany, Richard D. Weisel

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBicuspid aortic valveMedicinePathophysiologyCardiologyDiseaseBicuspid valveAortaInternal medicineIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bicuspid aortic valve is a common congenital cardiac malformation with a broad spectrum of clinical outcomes. Bicuspid aortic valve may go undetected throughout an individual's lifetime or, alternatively, they may have devastating clinical consequences, resulting in death. Both clinicians and medical scientists have taken a renewed interest in the development, pathophysiology and treatment options for this subtle but often substantial clinical entity. Evidence is mounting to suggest that an underlying disease of the aorta is inherited with bicuspid aortic valve, although considerable controversy surrounds this theory. Novel molecular mechanisms underlying the valve and vascular pathologies, as well as new surgical therapies for these patients have been proposed in the past 10 years.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations67
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesFrench-language works237,207