MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Strategies for Surgical Myocardial Revascularization

2018· review· en· W2899924817 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Gaudino, Faisal G. Bakaeen, Piroze Davierwala, Antonino Di Franco, Stephen E. Fremes, Nirav Patel, John D. Puskas, Marc Ruel, Gianluca Torregrossa, Michael P. Vallely, David P. Taggart

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersSociety of Thoracic Surgeons
KeywordsMedicineBypass graftingArteryRevascularizationPercutaneousPercutaneous coronary interventionCardiologySurgeryRandomized controlled trialInternal medicineMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We summarize the evidence on the new strategies for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Hybrid CABG implies surgical grafting of the left anterior descending artery and percutaneous treatment of the other target vessels, with the promise of combining the durable benefits of surgery with the less invasive approach of percutaneous coronary interventions. Robotic CABG and minimally invasive CABG are performed through minimal incision or port access with dedicated equipment and instruments. Anaortic coronary artery bypass refers to off-pump CABG using only in-situ grafts. The use of multiple arterial grafts has been shown to improve patency and is potentially associated with better clinical outcomes. All these techniques require dedicated training and are more complex than conventional CABG but can significantly improve the results of surgery. Validation of the results of these new approaches in large randomized trials is a priority for the surgical community.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.925

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.346
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 teacher head, 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

Citations59
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiac and Coronary Surgery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207