MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2760542270

Abstract 18124: Delayed Staged Palliation Does Not Affect Clinical Outcomes for Children With Hypoplastic Left Heart Syndrome and Variants

2016· article· en· W2760542270 on OpenAlexaff
Devin Chetan, Christoph Haller, Steven M. Schwartz, Christopher A. Caldarone, Glen S. Van Arsdell, Osami Honjo

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypoplastic left heart syndromeFontan procedurePalliative careSurgeryStage (stratigraphy)Survival rateHeart failureCardiologyHeart diseaseInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Impact of delayed stage II and/or Fontan palliation on survival and Fontan physiology is not well understood. Hypothesis: Delayed staged palliation results in lower survival and worse Fontan outcomes. Methods: All 232 patients with HLHS undergoing stage I palliation from 2000-2011 were reviewed (Figure). The clinical course for patients who had delayed stage II (>7 months) or Fontan (>3.5 years) was documented. Patients were classified as having either minor or significant reasons for delayed palliation. Rates of on-time and overall Fontan completion, survival, transplant, and post-Fontan failure were compared between patients who did not meet (G1; n=28) and met (G2; n=125) conventional stage II palliation timelines. Rates of post-Fontan failure were also compared for patients who did not meet (G3; n=44) and met (G4; n=74) conventional Fontan completion timelines. Results: Delayed stage II palliation resulted in equivalent rates of on-time (G1: 15 [53.6%] vs G2: 59 [47.2%]; p=0.54) and delayed (G1: 10 [35.7%] vs G2: 34 [27.2%]; p=0.37) Fontan completion, with no difference noted between rates of delay because of minor or significant reasons (p Conclusions: Delayed timing of stage II and Fontan palliation did not impact survival or Fontan failure. While close followup and sensible rehabilitation strategy are likely contributors to equivalent outcomes, this result may partly be due to patients who never reached subsequent palliation because of inter-stage death or transplant.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCongenital Heart Disease Studies→French-language works237,207→