MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Team Science: American Heart Association’s Hypertension Strategically Focused Research Network Experience

2021· review· en· W3158788314 on OpenAlexaff
Richard C. Becker, David A. Calhoun, Allen W. Cowley, Joseph T. Flynn, Justin L. Grobe, Theodore A. Kotchen, Daniel T. Lackland, Kimberly K. Leslie, Mingyu Liang, David L. Mattson, Kevin Meyers, Mark Mitsnefes, Paul Muntner, Gary L. Pierce, Jennifer S. Pollock, Curt D. Sigmund, S. Justin Thomas, Elaine M. Urbina, Srividya Kidambi

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsKimberly-Clark (Canada)
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
KeywordsMedicinePopulationBlood pressureResearch centerFamily medicineGerontologyInternal medicinePathologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2015, the American Heart Association awarded 4-year funding for a Strategically Focused Research Network focused on hypertension composed of 4 Centers: Cincinnati Children's Hospital, Medical College of Wisconsin, University of Alabama at Birmingham, and University of Iowa. Each center proposed 3 integrated (basic, clinical, and population science) projects around a single area of focus relevant to hypertension. Along with scientific progress, the American Heart Association put a significant emphasis on training of next-generation hypertension researchers by sponsoring 3 postdoctoral fellows per center over 4 years. With the center projects being spread across the continuum of basic, clinical, and population sciences, postdoctoral fellows were expected to garner experience in various types of research methodologies. The American Heart Association also provided a number of leadership development opportunities for fellows and investigators in these centers. In addition, collaboration was highly encouraged among the centers (both within and outside the network) with the American Heart Association providing multiple opportunities for meeting and expanding associations. The area of focus for the Cincinnati Children's Hospital Center was hypertension and target organ damage in children utilizing ambulatory blood pressure measurements. The Medical College of Wisconsin Center focused on epigenetic modifications and their role in pathogenesis of hypertension using human and animal studies. The University of Alabama at Birmingham Center's areas of research were diurnal blood pressure patterns and clock genes. The University of Iowa Center evaluated copeptin as a possible early biomarker for preeclampsia and vascular endothelial function during pregnancy. In this review, challenges faced and successes achieved by the investigators of each of the centers are presented.

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)0.055
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0550.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
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 venueHypertensionSame topicBirth, Development, and HealthFrench-language works237,207