MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2410629063 · doi:10.1051/ject/201547223

Factor V Leiden and Cardiopulmonary Bypass

2015· article· en· W2410629063 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Uppal, Mark W. Rosin, J. Marcoux, Marnie L. Olson, Jennifer Bezaire, Gregory B. Dalshaug

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of ExtraCorporeal Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsRoyal University Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiopulmonary bypassProtamineHeparinActivated clotting timeThrombelastographyAntithrombinMedicineAprotininAnesthesiaPlatelet factor 4CardiologySurgeryInternal medicinePlatelet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a case of a patient with factor V Leiden with an antithrombin III activity of 67% who received a successful aortic valve replacement supported by cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). A safe level of anticoagulation was achieved by monitoring activated clotting time (ACT) and heparin concentration ensuring adequate anticoagulation throughout the procedure. Results from ACT, heparin dose response, heparin protamine titration, and thrombelastography are given. Factor V Leiden patients can be safely anti-coagulated using heparin for CPB procedures when monitored with ACT, heparin protamine titration, and thrombelastography. Postoperative chest tube losses were 360 mL, less than half our institutional average. Anticoagulation for the pre-and post-operative phase is also discussed.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ExtraCorporeal TechnologySame topicBlood Coagulation and Thrombosis MechanismsFrench-language works237,207