MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2930117093 · doi:10.1111/echo.14319

Diagnosis and follow‐up of idiopathic dilatation of inferior vena cava

2019· article· en· W2930117093 on OpenAlex
Ify Mordi, Usha Manian, Rodrigo Bagur, Nikolaos Tzemos

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEchocardiography · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular anomalies and interventions
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInferior vena cavaMagnetic resonance imagingProspective cohort studyCardiologyCohortInternal medicineRadiologyCardiac magnetic resonanceCardiac magnetic resonance imagingVenous return curveHemodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the absence of cardiac pathology, the presence of a dilated inferior vena cava (IVC) is considered idiopathic. To date, this phenomenon has only been described in athletic individuals as an adaptation to chronically augmented venous return. This is the largest prospective cohort study, following ten individuals with idiopathic dilated IVC against an age-matched control group with annual echocardiograms and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging for a median of 55 months. No significant difference was found between echocardiography and CMR measurements in IVC diameter assessment both at baseline and at follow-up. Over the study period, there was no significant progression of the IVC in diameter as measured either by echocardiography or CMR. None of the patients suffered any cardiovascular events, and there were no hospitalizations. Our findings indicate the benign nature of this condition and provide reassurance with regard to future clinical implications.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.238 · 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