MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793511195 · doi:10.14740/jmc.v9i3.3011

A Case of Recurrent Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy: Not a Benign Entity

2018· article· en· W2793511195 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anthony H. Kashou, Adam Custer, Nabil Braiteh, Pranava Ganesh, Keyoor Patel, Hisham E. Kashou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTakotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiomyopathyCardiologyCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineCardiac catheterizationVentricular fibrillationPathologicalAcute coronary syndromeImplantable cardioverter-defibrillatorTakotsubo syndromeHeart failureMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy is a relatively uncommon condition triggered by severe physical and/or emotional stress. It is characterized by transient ventricular wall dysfunction in the absence of coronary artery disease (CAD). Herein, we report a case of a 59-year-old female who had three episodes of recurrent Takotsubo cardiomyopathy. On each occasion, she presented with symptoms of acute coronary syndrome accompanied by left ventricular wall motion abnormalities; however, repeat cardiac catheterization failed to show CAD. Each recurrence resulted in resolution of her symptoms and recovery of left ventricular function. While emotional triggers were identified, on two occasions, the patient presented with ventricular fibrillation for which an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) was ultimately placed. We encourage clinicians to no longer look at Takotsubo cardiomyopathy as a benign, reversible disease process, but rather as a pathological entity with real, life-threatening complications that may be managed with ICD placement. J Med Cases. 2018;9(3):98-102 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/jmc3011w

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.615

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicTakotsubo Cardiomyopathy and Associated PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207