MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Novel Applications for Invasive and Non-invasive Tools in the Era of ContemporaryPercutaneous Coronary Revascularisation

2021· review· en· W3128599962 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Alkhalil

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Cardiology Reviews · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoronary Interventions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronary artery diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionCardiologyConventional PCICADInternal medicinePositron emission tomographyStentMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an expanding treatment option for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). It is considered the default strategy for unstable presentation of CAD. PCI techniques have evolved over the last 4 decades with significant improvements in stent design, increase in functional assessment of coronary lesions, and the use of intra-vascular imaging. Nonetheless, the morbidity and mortality related to CAD remain significant. Advances in technology have allowed better understanding of the nature andprogression of CAD. New tools are now available that reflect the pathophysiological changes at the level of the myocardium and coronary atherosclerotic plaque. Certain changes within the plaque would render it more prone to rupture leading to acute vascular events. These changes are potentially detected using novel tools invasively, such near infra-red spectroscopy, or non-invasively using T2 mapping cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR)and18F-Sodium Fluoride positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Similarly, changes at the level of the injured myocardium are feasibly assessed invasively using index microcirculatory resistance or non-invasively using T1 mapping CMR. Importantly, these changes could be detected immediately with the opportunity to tailor treatment to those considered at high risk. Concurrently, novel therapeutic options have demonstrated promising results in reducingfuture cardiovascular risks in patients with CAD. This Review article will discuss the role of these novel tools and their applicability in employing mechanical and pharmacological treatment to mitigate cardiovascular risk in patients with CAD.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Cardiology ReviewsSame topicCoronary Interventions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207