Imaging the adult with simple shunt lesions: position paper from the EACVI and the ESC WG on ACHD. Endorsed by AEPC (Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2018, the position paper 'Imaging the adult with congenital heart disease: a multimodality imaging approach' was published. The paper highlights, in the first part, the different imaging modalities applied in adult congenital heart disease patients. In the second part, these modalities are discussed more detailed for moderate to complex anatomical defects. Because of the length of the paper, simple lesions were not touched on. However, imaging modalities to use for simple shunt lesions are still poorly known. One is looking for structured recommendations on which they can rely when dealing with an (undiscovered) shunt lesion. This information is lacking for the initial diagnostic process, during repair and at follow-up. Therefore, this paper will focus on atrial septal defect, ventricular septal defect, and persistent arterial duct. Pre-, intra-, and post-procedural imaging techniques will be systematically discussed. This position paper will offer algorithms that might help at a glance. The document is prepared for general cardiologists, trainees, medical students, imagers/technicians to select the most appropriate imaging modality and to detect the requested information for each specific lesion. It might serve as reference to which researchers could refer when setting up a (imaging) study.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.010 |
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.
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".