MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885892487 · doi:10.1177/0885066618789879

Contemporary Management of the High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism: The Clot Thickens

2018· review· en· W2885892487 on OpenAlexaff
Peter M. Reardon, Krishan Yadav, Ariel Hendin, Alan Karovitch, Michael Hickey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intensive Care Medicine · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntensive care medicinePulmonary embolismHarmRisk managementRisk assessmentIntervention (counseling)ExtracorporealSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common disease process encountered in the acute care setting. It presents on a spectrum of severity with the most severe presentations carrying a substantial risk of morbidity and mortality. In recent years, a wide range of competing treatment strategies have been proposed for the high-risk PE including new catheter-based and extracorporeal techniques, and management has become more challenging. There is currently no consensus as to the optimal approach to treatment. Contemporary management decisions are informed by the balance between the risk of deterioration and the risk of harm from intervention, within the available resources. This review will summarize the current evidence to better inform clinical decision-making in high-risk PE and highlight future directions in management.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Intensive Care MedicineSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207