Mortality with congenital heart defects in England and Wales, 1959–2009. Much progress, but more to do
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dr Knowles and colleagues present foundational epidemiologic research about congenital heart defects.1 Their study demonstrates a dramatic reduction in mortality from congenital heart disease over this 50-year period. The magnitude of reduction in the number of deaths is so great that they chose to use a logarithmic scale in their figures. Their work, which pertains exclusively to improvements in the UK, complements a similar literature from other settings using population-based data from USA,2 Canada3 and other centres in Europe. Their study takes advantage of death data obtained from the Office for National Statistics in England and Wales, as well as other routinely collected population-based data and covers a 50-year time period. Other studies have used a similar methodology over shorter periods or have focused on reductions in infant mortality, surgical survival or survival to adulthood. Taken together, in all settings capable of surgery and other treatments for congenital heart defects, reductions in death have been dramatic and sustained with most patients surviving both early childhood and beyond. Beyond this dramatic improvement in survival as well as shifts in age at death, …
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".