MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776440379 · doi:10.14740/cr641w

A History of Kawasaki Disease From Childhood and Coronary Artery Ectasia With Recurrent ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Therapeutic Challenge

2017· article· en· W2776440379 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ashraf Abugroun, Daniel Vilchez, Osama Hallak, Anahita Shahrrava

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKawasaki Disease and Coronary Complications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary artery ectasiaEctasiaKawasaki diseaseMyocardial infarctionThrombusCoronary artery diseaseCoronary arteriesArteryRight coronary arteryCoronary angiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coronary artery ectasia (CAE) is an uncommon anomaly, usually found in 1.2-2% of patients undergoing coronary angiography, defined as a segment of the coronary artery that has a diameter of more than 1.5 times the normal adjacent segments. Atherosclerosis is considered as the cause of half of the CAE cases. We herein present a 65-year-old Asian male with past medical history of Kawasaki disease (KD) who developed recurrent episodes of inferior wall ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) despite treatment with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Repeat coronary angiogram showed severely ectatic and tortuous coronary arteries more predominant on the right coronary artery (RCA) with diffuse thrombus in its mid segment. Given his unfavorable vascular anatomy, the condition was managed medically with the addition of warfarin to his DAPT with target international normalized ratio (INR) 2 - 3. This case highlights the association of CAE with a prior history of KD and its therapeutic challenge.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology ResearchSame topicKawasaki Disease and Coronary ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207