MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 3002: Left Ventricular Diameter Predicts Recovery in Acute Cardiomyopathy: Results of the IMAC 2 Trial

2007· article· en· W2233122207 on OpenAlexaff
Randall C. Starling, Leslie T. Cooper, GW Dec, John Boehmer, Peter Liu, Daniel Pauly, John Gorscan, Masaki Tanabe, Kevin E. Kip, Dennis M. McNamara

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicViral Infections and Immunology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionInternal medicineCardiologyAcute myocarditisCardiomyopathyHeart failureMyocarditisClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction : The incidence of spontaneous clinical improvement in acute cardiomyopathy (ACM) patients treated with evidence based medical therapy is unknown. We hypothesized that pts without LV dilatation at presentation would have the greatest potential for recovery of ejection fraction (EF). Methods: A multi-center NHLBI sponsored trial, Intervention in Myocarditis and Acute Cardiomyopathy II (IMAC 2) was designed to study the clinical course of ACM and the mechanisms associated with outcomes. A clinical, echocardiography, and genetics core lab are established. Results: 15 centers have enrolled 215 pts, mean age 45 ± 14 yrs, 34% female, NYHA class I–IV% 18/54/21/7, baseline EF 0.25 ± 0.09. Therapy included 80% beta blockers and 92% ACE or ARB treated. All patients enrolled had symptoms for ≤ 6 mos and were diagnosed with acute, idiopathic cardiomyopathy or myocarditis. Baseline and 6 mo echoes in 140 pts reviewed by the core lab demonstrated increased ejection fraction (EF): 0.25 ± 0.09 to 0.40 ± 0.11 p<0.001; mean increase 0.15 ± 0.10. Recovery in EF from baseline to 6 mos was related to LVEDD at baseline as shown in the Figure . Kaplan Meier survival n=207 at 1 and 2 years 96% and 94% and transplant free survival at 1 and 2 yrs 92% and 91%. Conclusions: Results of IMAC 2 reveal a marked spontaneous improvement in EF over 6 months, greatest in those with non-dilated LVEDD at baseline, and excellent overall survival in ACM pts treated with evidence based therapies.

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)0.003
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicViral Infections and Immunology ResearchFrench-language works237,207