MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006145528 · doi:10.21037/cdt.2019.12.01

Role of CT imaging in left atrial appendage occlusion for the WATCHMAN™ device

2020· review· en· W3006145528 on OpenAlexaff
Mirna Kaafarani, Jacqueline Saw, Matthew J. Daniels, Thomas Song, Marianne Rollet, Sanel Kesinovic, Tony T Lamorgese, Kati Kubiak, Zhihua Qi, Milan Pantelic, W. Charles O’Neill, Dee Dee Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeft atrial appendage occlusionInteratrial septumLeft atriumAppendageOcclusionComputed tomographyRadiologyAtrial fibrillationAnatomyCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computed tomography (CT) plays a key role in the peri-procedural planning of left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) device placement and post-procedural evaluation. The geometric variability of the interatrial septum, left atrium, and the left atrial appendage morphology can be fully visualized and intuitively appreciated through CT-derived, patient-specific 3D model unique to each individual's anatomy. This review further defines the strengths and limitations of CT peri-procedural imaging in the planning of LAAO.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiovascular Diagnosis and TherapySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207