MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788038463 · doi:10.1053/j.ajkd.2017.12.006

Management of Heart Failure in Advancing CKD: Core Curriculum 2018

2018· review· en· W2788038463 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew A. House

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKidney diseaseHeart failureIntensive care medicineHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionPopulationEjection fractionRandomized controlled trialDiabetes mellitusDiseaseInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)CardiologyEndocrinologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart failure and chronic kidney disease have increasing incidence and prevalence owing in part to the aging population and increasing rates of hypertension, diabetes, and other cardiovascular and kidney disease risk factors. The presence of one condition also has a strong influence on the other, leading to greater risks for hospitalization, morbidity, and death, as well as very high health care costs. Despite the frequent coexistence of heart failure and chronic kidney disease, many of the pivotal randomized trials that guide the management of heart failure have excluded patients with more advanced stages of chronic kidney disease. In this Core Curriculum article, management of a challenging, yet not unusual, case of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in a patient with stage 4 chronic kidney disease provides an opportunity to review the relevant literature and highlight gaps in our knowledge.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.315 · 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

Citations69
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Kidney DiseasesSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207