MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3156395368 · doi:10.2196/25397

The United States Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension Registry: Protocol for a Prospective, Longitudinal Study

2021· article· en· W3156395368 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kim M. Kerr, C. Gregory Elliott, Raymond L. Benza, Richard N. Channick, Kelly Chin, R. Duane Davis, Sonia Jain, Andrea Z. LaCroix, Michael M. Madani, Vallerie V. McLaughlin, Myung H. Park, Victor F. Tapson, William R. Auger

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBayer HealthCareUniversity of California, San DiegoUniversity of California
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary embolismObservational studyPopulationEmergency medicinePulmonary hypertensionIntensive care medicinePediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) is a rare sequela of acute pulmonary embolism that is treatable when recognized. Awareness of this disease has increased with recent advancements in therapeutic options, but delays in diagnosis remain common, and diagnostic and treatment guidelines are often not followed. Data gathered from international registries have improved our understanding of CTEPH, but these data may not be applicable to the US population owing to differences in demographics and medical practice patterns. OBJECTIVE: The US CTEPH Registry (US-CTEPH-R) was developed to provide essential information to better understand the demographics, risk factors, evaluation, and treatment of CTEPH in the United States, as well as the short- and long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical therapies in the modern treatment era. METHODS: Thirty sites throughout the United States enrolled 750 subjects in this prospective, longitudinal, observational registry of patients newly diagnosed with CTEPH. Enrollment criteria included a mean pulmonary artery pressure ≥25 mmHg by right heart catheterization and radiologic confirmation of CTEPH by a multidisciplinary adjudication committee. Following enrollment, subjects were followed biannually until the conclusion of the study. Quality of life surveys were administered at enrollment and biannually, and all other testing was at the discretion of the treating clinician. Details regarding surgical therapy, balloon pulmonary angioplasty, and medical therapy were collected at enrollment and at follow-up, as well as information related to health care utilization and survival. RESULTS: Data from this registry will improve understanding of the demographics, risk factors, and treatment patterns of patients with CTEPH, and the longitudinal impact of therapies on quality of life, health care utilization, and survival. CONCLUSIONS: This manuscript details the methodology and design of the first large, prospective, longitudinal registry of patients with CTEPH in the United States. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02429284; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02429284. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/25397.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.298
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→