MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980424228 · doi:10.1111/chd.12851

Impact of durable ventricular assist devices on post‐transplant outcomes in adults with congenital heart disease

2019· article· en· W2980424228 on OpenAlexaff
Ari Cedars, Luke J. Burchill, S. Lucy Roche, Jonathan N. Menachem, Kelly Axsom, Kristen M. Tecson

Bibliographic record

VenueCongenital Heart Disease · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineHeart diseaseIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There are no published data on post-transplant outcomes in durable ventricular assist device (VAD)-supported adult congenital heart disease (ACHD) patients. METHODS: We compared post-transplant outcomes in VAD-supported vs non-VAD-supported ACHD patients using the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. RESULTS: At 1 year, there was no difference in post-transplant mortality between VAD-supported (12 patients) and non-VAD-supported (671 patients) ACHD patients. CONCLUSIONS: In appropriate ACHD patients, VAD use as a bridge to transplant is a reasonable strategy.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCongenital Heart DiseaseSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207