MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

P5356Left atrial deformation in patients with moderate to severe aortic stenosis and heart failure

2018· article· en· W2905540220 on OpenAlexaff
François Simard, Eileen O’Meara, Anique Ducharme, Normand Racine, Michel White, Anita Asgar, R. Ibrahim, Jean‐François Dorval, R Bonan, Jean L. Rouleau, Raymond Cartier, I. El-Hamamsy, A. Basmadjian, C. Henri

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineStenosisHeart failure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Presence of heart failure (HF) in patients with moderate to severe aortic stenosis (AS) is related to diastolic dysfunction. Left atrial (LA) deformation, a novel technique, may be more closely associated with HF than E/e' ratio. The aim of this study was to compare the association of both methods with the presence of HF in patients with AS. Methods: 71 patients with moderate to severe AS (<1.5cm2) and preserved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction were included. The presence of HF was defined as NYHA≥2 and NT-proBNP≥360pg/mL. LA deformation was evaluated using speckle tracking analysis. Functional capacity was assessed using 6-minute walk test distance and 5 meters gait speed. Results: Patients with HF were significantly older (78±6 vs 67±13, p=0.001) with higher NT-proBNP level (954±833 vs 219±269pg/mL, p<0.001). AS severity, LV function or E/e' ratio were not associated with HF (Table 1). LA late diastolic strain, systolic and early and late diastolic strain rates (contractile, reservoir and conduit function) were significantly worse in HF patients. Patients with HF walked a significantly shorter 6-minute walk distance compared to asymptomatic (Δ 64m, p=0.020) with a significantly slower 5 meters gait speed (1.5±0.6 vs 2.0±0.8m/s, p=0.007). Statistically significant correlations were found between LA systolic strain and NT-proBNP (r=-0.388, p=0.002), 6-minute walk test distance (r=0.420, p=0.001) and 5 meters gait speed (r=0.420, p=0.001).

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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 topicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→