Risk assessment, prognosis and guideline implementation in pulmonary arterial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current European guidelines recommend periodic risk assessment for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). The aim of our study was to determine the association between the number of low-risk criteria achieved within 1 year of diagnosis and long-term prognosis. Incident patients with idiopathic, heritable and drug-induced PAH between 2006 and 2016 were analysed. The number of low-risk criteria present at diagnosis and at first re-evaluation were assessed: World Health Organization (WHO)/New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class I or II, 6-min walking distance (6MWD) >440 m, right atrial pressure <8 mmHg and cardiac index ≥2.5 L·min −1 ·m −2 . 1017 patients were included (mean age 57 years, 59% female, 75% idiopathic PAH). After a median follow-up of 34 months, 238 (23%) patients had died. Each of the four low-risk criteria independently predicted transplant-free survival at first re-evaluation. The number of low-risk criteria present at diagnosis (p<0.001) and at first re-evaluation (p<0.001) discriminated the risk of death or lung transplantation. In addition, in a subgroup of 603 patients with brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) measurements, the number of three noninvasive criteria (WHO/NYHA functional class, 6MWD and BNP/NT-proBNP) present at first re-evaluation discriminated prognostic groups (p<0.001). A simplified risk assessment tool that quantifies the number of low-risk criteria present accurately predicted transplant-free survival in PAH.
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 | 0.009 | 0.072 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".