MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899936561 · doi:10.1183/13993003.01626-2018

Predictors of 1-year compliance with adaptive servoventilation in patients with heart failure and sleep disordered breathing: preliminary data from the ADVENT-HF trial

2018· letter· en· W2899936561 on OpenAlexafffund
Elisa Perger, Owen D. Lyons, Toru Inami, Stephanie S. Smith, John S. Floras, Alexander G. Logan, T. Douglas Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2018
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsSinai Health SystemCanadian Sleep & Circadian NetworkWomen's College HospitalToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchIstituto Auxologico ItalianoFaculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São PauloLondon Health Sciences CentreUniversitätsklinikum RegensburgToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of OttawaMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreQueen's UniversityInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec, Université LavalMcMaster UniversityUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity Health Network
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureSleep disordered breathingSleep (system call)Compliance (psychology)BreathingClinical trialRandomized controlled trialCardiologyInternal medicinePhysical therapyIntensive care medicineAnesthesiaObstructive sleep apnea

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adherence to sleep apnoea treatment is essential to evaluate trials involving cardiovascular end-points. In patients with heart failure and obstructive or central sleep apnoea in the ADVENT-HF trial, adherence to adaptive servoventilation was very good.http://ow.ly/5sNz30mDj2W

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)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207