MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2533673836 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/jew190

The clinical use of stress echocardiography in non-ischaemic heart disease: recommendations from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging and the American Society of Echocardiography

2016· review· en· W2533673836 on OpenAlexaff
Patrizio Lancellotti, Patricia A. Pellikka, Werner Budts, Farooq A. Chaudhry, Erwan Donal, Raluca Dulgheru, Thor Edvardsen, Madalina Garbi, Jong‐Won Ha, Garvan C. Kane, Joe Kreeger, Luc Mertens, Philippe Pîbarot, Eugenio Picano, Thomas Ryan, Jeane Mike Tsutsui, Albert Varga

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular Imaging · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecSickKids FoundationUniversité LavalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIschaemic heart diseaseMedicineCardiologyStress EchocardiographyInternal medicineDiseaseHeart diseaseHemodynamicsIntensive care medicineRadiologyCoronary artery disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A unique and highly versatile technique, stress echocardiography (SE) is increasingly recognized for its utility in the evaluation of non-ischaemic heart disease. SE allows for simultaneous assessment of myocardial function and haemodynamics under physiological or pharmacological conditions. Due to its diagnostic and prognostic value, SE has become widely implemented to assess various conditions other than ischaemic heart disease. It has thus become essential to establish guidance for its applications and performance in the area of non-ischaemic heart disease. This paper summarizes these recommendations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations434
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal - Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207