MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reference Values for Pulse Wave Doppler and Tissue Doppler Imaging in Pediatric Echocardiography

2015· article· en· W2548214869 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Dallaire, Cameron Slorach, Wei Hui, Taisto Sarkola, Mark K. Friedberg, Timothy J. Bradley, Edgar Jaeggi, Andréea Dragulescu, Ronnie Har, David Z.I. Cherney, Luc Mertens

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Imaging · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDoppler effectMedicineResidualDoppler imagingParametric statisticsDoppler echocardiographyHeteroscedasticityInternal medicineMathematicsStatisticsPhysicsAlgorithmDiastole

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In pediatric echocardiography, pulse wave Doppler, and tissue Doppler imaging velocities are widely used to assess cardiac function. Current reference values and Z scores, allowing adjustment for growth are limited by inconsistent methodologies and small sample size. Using a standardized approach for parametric modeling and Z score quality assessment, we propose new pediatric reference values and Z score equations for most left ventricular pulse wave Doppler and tissue Doppler imaging measurements. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-three healthy pediatric subjects 1 to 18 years of age were prospectively recruited. Thirteen pulse wave Doppler and 14 tissue Doppler imaging measurements were recorded. Normalization for growth was done via a complete and standardized approach for parametric nonlinear regression modeling. Several analyses were performed to ensure adequate Z score distribution and to detect potential residual associations with growth or residual heteroscedasticity. Most measurements adopted a nonlinear relationship with growth and displayed significant heteroscedasticity. Compared with age, height, and weight, normalization for body surface area was most efficient in removing the effect of growth. Generally, polynomial and allometric models yielded adequate goodness-of-fit. Residual values for several measurements had significant departure from the normal distribution, which could be corrected using logarithmic or reciprocal transformation. Overall, weighted parametric nonlinear models allowed us to compute Z score equations with adequate normal distribution and without residual association with growth. CONCLUSIONS: We present Z scores for normalized pulse wave Doppler and tissue Doppler imaging in pediatric echocardiography. Further studies are needed to define the threshold beyond which health becomes a disease by integrating other important factors such as ventricular morphology, loading conditions, and heart rate.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations103
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207