MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087016021 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.1517

July 2020 at a Glance: Focus on Imaging and Cardiomyopathies

2020· article· en· W3087016021 on OpenAlexaff
Daniela Tomasoni, Marianna Adamo, Marco Metra

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineHeart failureHazard ratioMyocardial infarctionDilated cardiomyopathyCardiomyopathySudden cardiac deathDiabetes mellitusConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data on epidemiology of cardiomyopathies are limited.1–3 Merlo et al.4 showed a reduction in mortality, heart transplantation, left ventricular (LV) assist device implantation and sudden cardiac death in the last decade, compared with the previous ones, in patients with non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). Outcomes were also dependent on specific phenotypes with the poorest in patients with chemotherapy-induced DCM and the best in those with tachycardia-induced DCM. An analysis of the Swedish Heart Failure (HF) Register of the young patients with HF, compared with the others, showed that patients aged <55 years were more likely to have DCM, obesity, congenital heart disease, and a low LV ejection fraction (LVEF). Patients aged <55 years had a five times higher mortality risk compared with control subjects with the highest risk in the youngest ones, 18-34 years old.5 Diabetes is a known risk factor for cardiovascular death in patients with a recent myocardial infarction.6 Shin et al.7 showed the independent prognostic value for HF hospitalizations or cardiovascular death of glycated haemoglobin (A1C) levels (adjusted hazard ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.21 per 1% higher A1C) and LVEF in patients with type 2 diabetes and a recent acute coronary syndrome.

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)0.004
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2870.140

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreEditorial

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 venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207