MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Gelweave Valsalva Graft to Better Reconstruct the Anatomy of the Aortic Root

2016· article· en· W2339521831 on OpenAlexaff
Yijun Fu, Robert Guidoin, Ruggero De Paulis, Jing Lin, Bin Li, Lu Wang, Mark Nutley, Denis Desaulniers, Ze Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Long-Term Effects of Medical Implants · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBentall procedureAscending aortaMedicineAortaAortic valveProsthesisAnastomosisAortic rootSurgeryCardiologyAnatomyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bentall procedure introduced in 1968 represents an undisputed cure to treat multiple pathologies involving the aortic valve and the ascending thoracic aorta. Over the years, multiple modifications have been introduced as well as a standardized approach to the operation with the goal to prevent long-term adverse events. The Gelweave Valsalva graft provides a novel manner to more efficiently reconstruct the anatomy of the aortic root either with a valve-sparing procedure or with the implantation of a valved conduit (bioprosthesis or mechanical valve). The prosthesis holds three sections: the collar anchoring the valve; the skirt mimicking the Valsalva, which is suitable for the anastomoses with the coronary arteries; and the main body of the graft, which is designed to replace the ascending aorta. The Gelweave Valsalva graft allows the Bentall operation to be standardized, and it provides a potential for longer durability with reduced adverse events.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Long-Term Effects of Medical ImplantsSame topicAortic Disease and Treatment ApproachesFrench-language works237,207