MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012644415 · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1708048

Comprehensive Echocardiographic Assessment of Ventricular Function and Pulmonary Pressure in the Neonatal Omphalocele Population

2020· article· en· W3012644415 on OpenAlexaff
Alexis K. Dal Col, Shazia Bhombal, Theresa A. Tacy, Susan R. Hintz, Jeffrey A. Feinstein, Gabriel Altit

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Perinatology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Anomalies and Fetal Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOmphaloceleCardiologyInternal medicinePulmonary hypertensionPopulationPulmonary arteryGestational ageHazard ratioConfidence intervalPregnancyFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) has been described in the neonatal omphalocele population. This study was aimed to describe cardiac function and PH severity using echocardiography in newborns with giant omphalocele (GO) and with non-GO and determine if right ventricular (RV) dysfunction is associated with mortality. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective, single-center analysis of first echocardiography among neonatal omphalocele patients born between 2004 and 2017 was conducted. Multivariate logistic and univariate Cox's regression was constructed to measure hazard ratio (HR) for death outcome. RESULTS: = 0.03). RV performance parameters (tricuspid annular plane excursion, HR = 0.40; fractional area change, HR = 0.90; and RV peak global longitudinal strain, HR = 1.39) were associated with mortality. These RV performance parameters remained associated in a multiple logistic regression accounting for gestational age and GO status. The overall population had abnormal eccentricity index and pulmonary artery acceleration time to RV ejection time ratio, two markers of PH. CONCLUSION: Patients with omphalocele have increased pulmonary pressure, with GO being worse than non-GO. RV dysfunction at initial echocardiography was significantly associated with mortality.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.253
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PerinatologySame topicCongenital Anomalies and Fetal SurgeryFrench-language works237,207