Echocardiography and cardiac resynchronization therapy in children and patients with congenital heart disease.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) has been shown to improve mortality and morbidity in adults with refractory heart failure and prolonged QRS-duration. Recent research data suggest that the therapeutic benefit is related to the effect of CRT on interventricular and intraventricular dyssynchrony associated with electrical dyssynchrony. However, around 30-40% of the patients do not respond to CRT when device implantation is based only on QRS-duration. It was hoped that improved description of mechanical dyssynchrony using imaging techniques, might result in improved identification of patients who could benefit from CRT. Different methods have been proposed but a recent multicenter prospective echocardiographic study (PROSPECT) was disappointing. Applying adult criteria for CRT treatment to children and adults with acquired and congenital heart disease is even more challenging due to the age-dependency of QRS-duration and the wide variety of underlying diseases including different ventricular morphology that can result in heart failure. In this review we will overview the adult and pediatric data of CRT treatment and propose a mechanistic approach that could potentially be helpful in trying to identify those patients who might benefit from the treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".