MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086751531 · doi:10.1111/echo.14856

The use of ultrasound to assess aortic biomechanics: Implications for aneurysm and dissection

2020· review· en· W3086751531 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura E. Mantella, Winnie Chan, Gianluigi Bisleri, Syed M. Ali Hassan, Kiera Liblik, Hanane Benbarkat, David E. Rival, Amer M. Johri

Bibliographic record

VenueEchocardiography · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
FundersCanada Foundation for InnovationOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyBiomechanicsAortaUltrasoundAneurysmAortic dissectionDissection (medical)Internal medicineRadiologyAortic aneurysmDiseaseAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arterial stiffening, which occurs when conduit arteries thicken and lose elasticity, has been associated with cardiovascular disease and increased risk for future cardiovascular events. Specifically, aortic stiffening plays a large role in the pathogenesis of vascular diseases, such as aneurysm formation and dissection. Current parameters used to assess risk of aortic rupture include absolute diameter and growth rate. However, these properties lack the reliability required to accurately risk-stratify patients. As with any elastic conduit, it is important to assess the biomechanical properties of the aorta in order to assess cardiovascular risk and prevent disease progression. There are several invasive and noninvasive methods by which stiffness of the large arteries can be assessed. Of particular interest are ultrasound-based methods, such as tissue Doppler imaging and speckle-tracking echocardiography, due to their noninvasive and feasible nature. In this review, we summarize studies demonstrating utility of noninvasive ultrasound imaging methods for measuring aortic biomechanics for the assessment and management of aortic aneurysms.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEchocardiographySame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207