MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2889286074 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehy566.5324

5324Reduction in heart failure admission rate after transcatheter edge-to-edge tricuspid valve repair for severe tricuspid regurgitation

2018· article· en· W2889286074 on OpenAlexaff
Edwin Ho, Neil Fam, Kim A. Connelly, Géraldine Ong, Jeremy Edwards, Alberto Pozzoli, Shingo Kuwata, Gökhan Gülmez, F. Nietlispach, Michel Züber, Rebecca T. Hahn, Francesco Maisano, Maurizio Taramasso

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRegurgitation (circulation)CardiologyInternal medicineTricuspid valveTricuspid Valve InsufficiencyHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Clinical improvement following transcatheter tricuspid valve repair with edge-to-edge devices for severe symptomatic tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has been demonstrated, including improvement in reported symptoms and objective functional capacity. The impact on heart failure related hospital admissions has not yet been described. Purpose: Evaluate the impact of transcatheter edge-to-edge tricuspid valve repair on heart failure admissions. Methods: All transcatheter tricuspid valve repair procedures for severe TR with a leaflet grasping device at two international teaching hospitals between December 1, 2015 and January 31, 2018 were reviewed. Heart failure admissions in the one year preceding the procedure and in the follow up period were defined as any hospital admission with left- or right-sided heart failure as a primary or secondary diagnosis. These were assessed through electronic medical records, clinical notes and by telephone contact if recent records were not available. Heart failure admission rate reduction was estimated with a Poisson model.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→