MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905582258 · doi:10.1183/13993003.01887-2018

Pathology and pathobiology of pulmonary hypertension: state of the art and research perspectives

2018· review· en· W2905582258 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Humbert, Christophe Guignabert, Sébastien Bonnet, Peter Dorfmüller, James R. Klinger, Mark R. Nicolls, Andrea Olschewski, Soni Savai Pullamsetti, Ralph T. Schermuly, Kurt R. Stenmark, Marlene Rabinovitch

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Respiratory Journal · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteStanford UniversityJanssen Research and DevelopmentUnited Therapeutics CorporationPfizer
KeywordsPulmonary hypertensionMedicineChronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertensionIntensive care medicineVascular remodelling in the embryoPulmonary vasculatureTranslational researchPulmonary pathologyDiseasePsychological interventionClinical PracticePathologyCardiologyLungInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical and translational research has played a major role in advancing our understanding of pulmonary hypertension (PH), including pulmonary arterial hypertension and other forms of PH with severe vascular remodelling ( e.g. chronic thromboembolic PH and pulmonary veno-occlusive disease). However, PH remains an incurable condition with a high mortality rate, underscoring the need for a better transfer of novel scientific knowledge into healthcare interventions. Herein, we review recent findings in pathology (with the questioning of the strict morphological categorisation of various forms of PH into pre- or post-capillary involvement of pulmonary vessels) and cellular mechanisms contributing to the onset and progression of pulmonary vascular remodelling associated with various forms of PH. We also discuss ways to improve management and to support and optimise drug development in this research field.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations1,274
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Respiratory JournalSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207