<scp>SCAI</scp> position statement on adult congenital cardiac interventional training, competencies and organizational recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Congenital heart disease (CHD) is the most common congenital anomaly and occurs in ~0.8% of all live births.Medical and surgical advancements over the past 80 years have resulted in markedly improved survival, and the majority of CHD patients are now surviving to reach adulthood.The number of adults with CHD (ACHD) in the United States now exceeds the number of pediatric patients.1 This changing demographic trend towards adulthood was first recognized in the early 1970s, and several clinics specializing in ACHD were developed in the 1980s.2 Over the past 40 years, there has been an incremental increase in the number of ACHD clinics and specialty centers, mostly based at large academic medical centers, and often staffed by both adult and pediatric cardiology specialists.Along with the rise in the number of ACHD patients, there has been a parallel increase in the volume and variety of transcatheter interventional procedures applicable to ACHD patients.The definition of ACHD can be somewhat arbitrary depending on the various stakeholders managing CHD patients and the institutional culture and expertise.Most agree that age 18 years is the typical cutoff that separates pediatric from adult patients.However, some Children's hospitals will accept CHD patients as old as 26 years or even
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.033 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.097 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".