MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082075604

The summary of the 2019 year in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

2020· article· en· W3082075604 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Małgorzata Lelonek

Bibliographic record

VenueFolia Cardiologica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeart failureEjection fractionMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyFraction (chemistry)Intensive care medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last years it is a good time in heart failure (HF) for innovative therapy. The results of new trials which were published after the last 2016 guidelines for HF need the systematic approach and provide evidence-based guidance for clinical practice. For that reason in the last year 2019 the experts of Heart Failure Association (HFA) European Society of Cardiology published the consensus. The present article summarized the main issues regarding heart failure with reduced ejection fraction together with comment based on the HFA expert consensus.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.010

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFolia CardiologicaSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207