MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2321458559 · doi:10.14740/jmc.v7i4.2410

Perioperative Management of Two Pediatric Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Undergoing Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures

2016· article· en· W2321458559 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sathappan Karuppiah, Ahsan Syed, Aymen Naguib, Joseph D. Tobias

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeHypertrophic cardiomyopathyCardiologyAfterloadInternal medicinePreloadSudden cardiac deathSurgeryHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is the most common genetic disease of the heart and remains an important etiology of sudden cardiac death in adolescents and young adults. Autosomal dominant inheritance of a mutation in one of the numerous genes encoding for proteins in the myocardial sarcomere leads to an abnormal myocyte growth pattern with hypertrophy. Perioperative management of patients with HCM for any type of surgical procedure carries an increased risk of morbidity and mortality related to the propensity for arrhythmias and myocardial ischemia. During the perioperative period, myocardial function may be impacted by alterations in preload, afterload, and myocardial contractility related to the surgical procedure, anesthetic agents, and changes in intravascular volume. We present two pediatric patients with a known diagnosis of HCM who presented for non-cardiac, minimally invasive surgical (MIS) procedures. The perioperative implications of HCM are reviewed with particular emphasis placed on the potential cardiovascular alterations induced by the MIS procedure with increases in intra-thoracic or intra-abdominal pressure. J Med Cases. 2016;7(4):115-119 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jmc2410w

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207