MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2268272895 · doi:10.1111/petr.12674

Now how do we get them home? Outpatient care of pediatric patients on mechanical circulatory support

2016· review· en· W2268272895 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Conway, Christina VanderPluym, Aamir Jeewa, Selvi Sinnadurai, Alec Schubert, Angela Lorts

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatric Transplantation · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsStollery Children's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureVentricular assist deviceIntensive care medicineMedical emergencyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last five yr have been monumental for the pediatric heart failure community. In the US, the most notable has been the FDA approval of the first pediatric specific device (Berlin Heart EXCOR(®) ; Berlin Heart, Inc., Berlin, Germany). Subsequently, the field of heart failure has gained a great deal of knowledge regarding the nuances of MCS in children. Despite FDA approval in the US, the Berlin EXCOR(®) is only currently indicated for in-hospital use. Due to the limitations with discharge and the positive in- hospital experiences with the Berlin EXCOR(®) , there has been an increased interest in the implantation of adult durable devices into children. While many institutions have focused their intial efforts on the first phase of care within the hospital, they are now ready to tackle the challenge of how to safely transition children to the community setting.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.219 · 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