Transcatheter aortic valve replacement over age 90: Risks vs benefits
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the population ages, clinicians will encounter a growing number of nonagenarians suffering from severe aortic stenosis who may be candidates for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). By virtue of a healthy survivor effect or a referral bias, these patients may paradoxically have greater resilience and fewer comorbidities than their octogenarian counterparts. They tend to, on average, tolerate the TAVR procedure quite well with low in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates of 5.5% and 23%, respectively. Appropriate patient selection should consider individualized estimates of procedural risk, potential for functional recovery and for improved quantity and quality of life. Frailty is much more revealing than chronological age, and it can be measured by brief tools such as the Essential Frailty Toolset. Ultimately, the process of shared decision-making is paramount to ensure that the course of action is patient-centered and balances the procedure's expected risks and benefits with the nonagenarian's preferences and values.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it