MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782684714 · doi:10.3389/fped.2017.00289

3D Printing in Surgical Management of Double Outlet Right Ventricle

2018· review· en· W2782684714 on OpenAlexaff
Shi‐Joon Yoo, Glen S. Van Arsdell

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pediatrics · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDouble outlet right ventricleSurgical simulationSurgical planningVentricleSurgeryCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Double outlet right ventricle (DORV) is a heterogeneous group of congenital heart diseases that require individualized surgical approach based on precise understanding of the complex cardiovascular anatomy. Physical 3-dimensional (3D) print models not only allow fast and unequivocal perception of the complex anatomy but also eliminate misunderstanding or miscommunication among imagers and surgeons. Except for those cases showing well-recognized classic surgical anatomy of DORV such as in cases with a typical subaortic or subpulmonary ventricular septal defect, 3D print models are of enormous value in surgical decision and planning. Furthermore, 3D print models can also be used for rehearsal of the intended procedure before the actual surgery on the patient so that the outcome of the procedure is precisely predicted and the procedure can be optimally tailored for the patient's specific anatomy. 3D print models are invaluable resource for hands-on surgical training of congenital heart surgeons.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations76
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PediatricsSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207