MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2898399562 · doi:10.1016/j.gheart.2018.09.471

PO610 The Natural History of Subclinical Rheumatic Heart Disease: Experience From North India

2018· article· en· W2898399562 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anitá Saxena, S Ramakrishnan, Ambuj Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Heart · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyEjection fractionInternal medicineHazard ratioConfidence intervalCardiac magnetic resonance imagingHeart diseaseSubclinical infectionHeart failureMagnetic resonance imagingRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Significant pulmonary regurgitation, declining right-sided ejection fraction, increased right ventricular (RV) volumes as well as left ventricular (LV) dysfunction have all been identified as predictors of poor outcomes in patients with congenital heart disease (CHD). The prognostic value of the cardiac output (CO) in these patients however has never been studied.All consecutive ambulatory adult patients with CHD referred for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the Montreal Children's Hospital between June 2007 and May 2009 were included. Right ventricular (RV) and left ventricular (LV) variables including end diastolic and end systolic volumes (EDV, ESV respectively), ejection fractions (EF) and regurgitant volumes were obtained. Cardiac index (CI) was calculated. Patients were followed for cardiac-related hospitalizations and cardiac interventions.Ninety-six patients were included. Median follow up was 3.9 ± 1.4 years. Nineteen percent of patients had a systemic CI < 2.4 l/min/m2. LVEDV, LVEF and RVEF were significantly diminished in the low CI group with a significant increase in RVESV and total regurgitant volume. Best predictors of low CI were LVEF (AUC = 0.74), RVEF (AUC = 0.71), total RV regurgitant volume (AUC = 0.64) and RVESV (AUC = 0.563). Low systemic CI was the best predictor of cardiac-related hospitalizations (hazard ratio 3.5, 95% confidence interval 1.5–8.5) and cardiac interventions (hazard ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.3–4.0), superior to LVEF, RVEF, total regurgitant volume and RVESV parameters.In patients with congenital heart disease, cardiac index is the best predictor of cardiac hospitalizations and cardiac interventions.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 venueGlobal HeartSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207