MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163474366 · doi:10.1002/uog.105

Reference values for an index of fetal aortic isthmus blood flow during the second half of pregnancy

2003· article· en· W2163474366 on OpenAlexaff
Jopje M. Ruskamp, Fouron Jc, Julie Gosselin, Marie‐Josée Raboisson, Claire Infante‐Rivard, F. Proulx

Bibliographic record

VenueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFetusGestational ageCardiologyDiastoleBlood flowInternal medicineGestationHemodynamicsPregnancyAnatomyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: During fetal life, the parallel position of the two cardiac ventricles confers a special status to the aortic isthmus. Flow through the isthmus reflects the balance between the performances of the two ventricles and their respective peripheral impedances. This study proposes a fetal aortic isthmus flow velocity index and its reference values defined on the basis of gestational age (GA). METHODS: Video recordings of 111 normal fetuses from 18 to 39 weeks of gestation were retrospectively reviewed. An isthmus flow velocity index (IFI) was calculated as follows: IFI = (systolic + diastolic)/systolic velocity integrals. GA-specific reference ranges of IFI were constructed. RESULTS: An IFI of 1.33 +/- 0.03 was found at 18 weeks. This value decreased slightly but steadily with GA to reach 1.23 +/- 0.16 at 39 weeks. This change is mainly related to a decrease in diastolic velocity integrals. CONCLUSION: The proposed IFI provides information on the direction and, indirectly, on the volume of blood flow through the fetal aortic isthmus.

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)0.009
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations66
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207