MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045421605 · doi:10.1177/2045894020941343

Hemodynamic trajectories and outcomes in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension

2020· article· en· W3045421605 on OpenAlexaff
Myriam Amsallem, Shadi P. Bagherzadeh, David Boulate, Andrew J. Sweatt, Kristina Kudelko, Yon K. Sung, Jeffrey A. Feinstein, Élie Fadel, Olaf Mercier, André Denault, François Haddad, Roham T. Zamanian

Bibliographic record

VenuePulmonary Circulation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary wedge pressureCardiologyMean arterial pressureInternal medicineBlood pressurePulmonary hypertensionCardiac catheterizationContinuous noninvasive arterial pressureHeart rate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relative pulmonary to systemic pressure ratio (mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure) has been proven to be valuable in cardiac surgery. Little is known on the prognostic value of baseline and trajectory of mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure in pulmonary arterial hypertension. Patients with confirmed idiopathic, familial, drug and toxins, or connective tissue disease‐related pulmonary arterial hypertension and at least one complete right heart catheterization were included and prospectively followed‐up for 5.9 ± 4.03 years. Correlates of the primary end point (i.e. death or lung transplant need) during follow‐up were determined using Cox regression modeling. Results showed that among the 308 patients included, 187 had at least one follow‐up catheterization (median time between catheterizations: 2.16 (1.16–3.19) years). In the total cohort (mean age 47.3 ± 14.9 years, 82.8% of female and 58.1% in New York Heart Association class 3 or 4), mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure (1.38 (1.07–1.77)) was associated with outcome (p = 0.01). Mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure was incremental to a basic model (including right atrial pressure, systolic blood pressure, New York Heart Association class 3 or 4, and connective tissue disease) for outcome prediction, while mean pulmonary arterial pressure was not. In the 187 patients with a follow‐up catheterization, both delta mean pulmonary arterial pressure and delta mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure were associated with outcome (1.32 (1.11–1.58) and 1.31 (1.1–1.57) respectively, p < 0.01). Mean pulmonary arterial pressure and mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure were both incremental to the basic model, while worsening in mean pulmonary arterial pressure or mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure did not reach significance. In conclusion, mean pulmonary arterial pressure/mean arterial pressure at baseline prognosticates long‐term outcome with a significant, albeit modest, incremental value to basic variables.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePulmonary CirculationSame topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207