MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516785432 · doi:10.1111/ped.13154

N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide diagnostic algorithm versus American Heart Association algorithm for Kawasaki disease

2016· article· en· W2516785432 on OpenAlex
Audrey Dionne, Léamarie Meloche‐Dumas, Laurent Desjardins, Jean M. Turgeon, Claire Saint‐Cyr, Julie Autmizguine, Linda Spigelblatt, Anne Fournier, Nagib Dahdah

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePediatrics International · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKawasaki Disease and Coronary Complications
Canadian institutionsHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversité LavalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAlgorithmKawasaki diseaseNatriuretic peptideTerminal (telecommunication)Association (psychology)Internal medicineCardiologyHeart failureComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of Kawasaki disease (KD) can be challenging in the absence of a confirmatory test or pathognomonic finding, especially when clinical criteria are incomplete. We recently proposed serum N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) as an adjunctive diagnostic test. METHODS: We retrospectively tested a new algorithm to help KD diagnosis based on NT-proBNP, coronary artery dilation (CAD) at onset, and abnormal serum albumin or C-reactive protein (CRP). The goal was to assess the performance of the algorithm and compare its performance with that of the 2004 American Heart Association (AHA)/American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) algorithm. RESULTS: The algorithm was tested on 124 KD patients with NT-proBNP measured on admission at the present institutions between 2007 and 2013. Age at diagnosis was 3.4 ± 3.0 years, with a median of five diagnostic criteria; and 55 of the 124 patients (44%) had incomplete KD. CA complications occurred in 64 (52%), with aneurysm in 14 (11%). Using this algorithm, 120/124 (97%) were to be treated, based on high NT-proBNP alone for 79 (64%); on onset CAD for 14 (11%); and on high CRP or low albumin for 27 (22%). Using the AHA/AAP algorithm, 22/47 (47%) of the eligible patients with incomplete KD would not have been referred for treatment, compared with 3/55 (5%) with the NT-proBNP algorithm (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This NT-proBNP-based algorithm is efficient to identify and treat patients with KD, including those with incomplete KD. This study paves the way for a prospective validation trial of the algorithm.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.320
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