MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889195100 · doi:10.17996/anc.18-00061

Regadenoson Stress in Patients with Airways Disease and Pulmonary Hypertension

2018· article· en· W2889195100 on OpenAlexaff
Eliana Reyes

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegadenosonMedicineAdenosineAsthmaDipyridamoleCardiologyCOPDBronchospasmAdenosine receptorVasodilationTolerabilityBronchodilationInternal medicineCoronary vasodilatorAnesthesiaMyocardial perfusion imagingCoronary artery diseaseReceptorBronchodilatorAgonistAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regadenoson is an increasingly used pharmacological stress agent for myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) that has an important advantage over other primary coronary vasodilators. Both adenosine and dipyridamole have a non-selective action on the adenosine receptors and can therefore induce bronchospasm in susceptible individuals. In contrast, regadenoson acts selectively on the adenosine receptor subtype responsible for the coronary vasodilator effect of these agents with little, if any, activity on adenosine receptor-mediated bronchoconstrictive pathways. This gives regadenoson an advantage over other vasodilators in the management of patients with obstructive airways disease undergoing stress MPI. There is compelling evidence for the improved tolerability of regadenoson stress in patients with a history of bronchial hyperreactivity. Moreover, regadenoson has proved to be safe in advanced forms of lung disease and is currently the preferred stress agent in these patients. Experience on the use of regadenoson in poorly controlled asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited, and thus caution must be exercised when considering regadenoson stress in patients with suspected persistent or clinically manifest airway obstruction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
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 venueAnnals of Nuclear CardiologySame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207