Cardiac Valvulopathy Associated with Pergolide Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the risk of pergolide associated cardiac valvulopathy in patients with Parkinson's disease. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Reference lists were reviewed and librarians were consulted to identify additional trials. STUDY SELECTION: All studies and case reports in the English literature on pergolide and cardiac valvulopathy. DATA EXTRACTION: Demographics of patients, study duration, dose and duration of pergolide use, echocardiogram results, length of follow-up, and clinical outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-two published articles were identified. There were no randomized controlled trials. Follow-up time varied between a few months and four years. Three case reports and four studies (three case control and one observational) assessed 246 patients. Evidence for valvulopathy was found in all studies. Variable methods were used to assess the degree of valvular regurgitation making comparisons between studies difficult. Little clinical correlation is available for echocardiogram results. Variable improvement was shown in the few patients in whom the drug was stopped. There is insufficient data to determine whether dose and duration or other comorbities have an effect on the risk of developing cardiac valvulopathy. CONCLUSION: Pergolide therapy is associated with an increased risk of developing cardiac valvulopathy but the true incidence and importance of this remains unknown. Further prospective studies are needed with standardized assessments of echocardiograms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".