MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172274458 · doi:10.1111/echo.12880

Right and Left Atrial Dissimilarities in Normal Subjects Explored by Speckle Tracking Echocardiography

2015· article· en· W2172274458 on OpenAlexaff
Sherif Moustafa, Hamed Zuhairy, Mostafa Youssef, Nanette Alvarez, Michael S. Connelly, Timothy Prieur, Farouk Mookadam

Bibliographic record

VenueEchocardiography · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiologyInternal medicineSpeckle tracking echocardiographyMedicineSystoleDiastoleCardiac cycleVentricleVentricular functionDiastolic functionEjection fractionHeart failureBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atrial function is an important contributor of ventricular function and has a prognostic role in various cardiovascular diseases. We tested the hypothesis that right and left atrial (RA & LA) function may not be equal despite their accommodating identical cardiac output. METHODS: Two-dimensional (2D) speckle tracking echocardiography was acquired from the apical four-chamber view in 100 normal subjects. Both RA/LA subendocardial borders were traced to obtain atrial volumes, strain (ε) and strain rate (SR). Reservoir, conduit, and booster pump functions were evaluated. Consequently, εNeg (corresponding to pump function) and εPos (corresponding to conduit function) were gauged. The SR parameters (SRLateNeg, SRPos, and SREarlyNeg), corresponding respectively to atrial systole, inception of ventricular systole, and inception of ventricular diastole, were measured. RESULTS: Mean age was 39 ± 15 years with 50 men (50%). Volumetric indices revealed that reservoir (Filling Volume = 35.1 ± 10.4 mL for LA vs. 27.47 ± 11.93 mL for RA, expansion index = 52.18 ± 16.89% for LA vs. 45.03 ± 16.49% for RA and diastolic emptying index = 52.85 ± 16.85 for LA vs. 45.62 ± 16.5 for RA, P < 0.001) and conduit (passive emptying (%) of total emptying = 34.49 ± 10.4 for LA vs. 26.82 ± 11.98 for RA and passive emptying index = 52.63 ± 16.86 for LA vs. 45.39 ± 16.5 for RA, P < 0.001) functions were significantly higher in the LA compared to the RA. Nevertheless, deformation indices demonstrated an opposite pattern (SRpos = 1.88 ± 0.74 for RA vs. 1.56 ± 0.54 for LA, P = 0.03 and εPos = 59.56 ± 30.63 for RA vs. 45.94 ± 16.67 for LA, P < 0.001). Reservoir, conduit, and booster pump functions showed no statistical significance among both genders. CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of global and regional RA/LA function by speckle tracking echocardiography is feasible. The current report provides insights regarding dissimilarities between both atria in healthy individuals. The significance of these findings and their potential application will warrant further work.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEchocardiographySame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207