Bibliographic record
Abstract
e live in a time characterized by rising nationalism, a renewed focus on national boundaries, and even border walls, some extant and others proposed.At the same time and in stark contrast with these global trends, cardiovascular disease knows no such boundaries.Its touch transcends nations; its impact is felt by all ethnic, racial, and religious groups and spans diverse socioeconomic strata and class.Regardless of our background, environment, and disposition, each of us is vulnerable to its reach.Just like cardiovascular disease, Circulation knows no boundaries.Our journal strives to have meaningful impact on the global consequences of cardiovascular disease by identifying, vetting, and fostering the best science across the full spectrum of investigation-fundamental, discovery research, translational studies, human physiology, clinical trials, and population and implementation science.To accomplish these goals, we have developed a strategy that leverages the energies of thought leaders positioned around the globe-in 15 countries spanning 10 time zones.We are proud that Circulation "has boots on the ground around the world, shining a bright light on the best science emerging globally." 1 In doing this, we draw inspiration from our predecessors who expanded the journal's content and purview.When Circulation was founded in 1950, then president of the American Heart Association, H. M. Marvin, noted that its name "most clearly indicates the journal's new scope-the entire circulation rather than the heart alone." 2 Later, in 1993, the scope of the journal's readership was the contemplative target of incoming Editor-in-Chief James T. Willerson, who proclaimed, "Circulation, although published by the American Heart Association, is a journal of cardiovascular medicine for the world." 3 He recruited more foreign-based and female physician/scientists, as well as basic scientists, to join the Editorial Board, and he "made other efforts to be inclusive of the general cardiovascular community."3 Under the leadership of Joseph Loscalzo, the journal accelerated this emphasis on diversity, inclusion, and global perspective.Fast forward to the 21st century.We announce here an exciting new initiative designed to capture and galvanize the diverse strengths of the international cardiovascular community by launching Circulation Global Rounds.We will capitalize on our global positioning to foster meaningful exchanges with thought leaders around the world.On a roughly quarterly basis, we will solicit their unique regional insights.What can the rest of us learn from them?Our overriding objective is to gauge the face of cardiovascular medicine and science around the world.Whereas a comprehensive discussion of all specifics is not likely to be feasible, we will ask our authors to select among the following topics:1. Provide an overview of the regional epidemiology of cardiovascular disease; 2. Delineate the most important challenges in cardiovascular medicine and how these challenges are being addressed;
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.217 | 0.096 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".