MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201428686 · doi:10.1002/ehf2.13588

HFA of the ESC Position Paper on the Management of LVAD Supported Patients for the Non LVAD Specialist Healthcare Provider Part 1: Introduction and at the Non-Hospital Settings in the Community

2021· article· en· W3201428686 on OpenAlex
Binyamin Ben Avraham, María G. Crespo‐Leiro, Gerasimos Filippatos, Israel Gotsman, Petar Seferović, Tal Hasin, Luciano Potena, Davor Miličić, Andrew J.S. Coats, Giuseppe Rosano, Frank Ruschitzka, Marco Metra, Stefan D. Anker, Johann Altenberger, Stamatis Adamopoulos, Yaron D. Barac, Ovidiu Chioncel, Nicolaas de Jonge, Jeremy Elliston, Maria Frigeiro, Eva Gonçalvesová, Avishay Grupper, Righab Hamdan, Yoav Hammer, Loreena Hill, Osnat Itzhaki Ben Zadok, Miriam Abuhazira, Jacob Lavee, Wilfried Müllens, Sanemn Nalbantgil, Massimo Piepoli, Piotr Ponikowski, Arsen Ristić, Arjang Ruhparwar, Aviv A. Shaul, Laurens F. Tops, Steven Tsui, Stephan Winnik, Tiny Jaarsma, Finn Gustafsson, Tuvia Ben Gal

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueESC Heart Failure · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureVentricular assist devicePosition paperHealth carePosition (finance)Intensive care medicineCardiologyMedical emergencyBusinessPathologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accepted use of left ventricular assist device (LVAD) technology as a good alternative for the treatment of patients with advanced heart failure together with the improved survival of the LVAD-supported patients on the device and the scarcity of donor hearts has significantly increased the population of LVAD-supported patients. The expected and non-expected device-related and patient-device interaction complications impose a significant burden on the medical system exceeding the capacity of the LVAD implanting centres. The ageing of the LVAD-supported patients, mainly those supported with the 'destination therapy' indication, increases the risk for those patients to experience comorbidities common in the older population. The probability of an LVAD-supported patient presenting with medical emergency to a local emergency department, internal, or surgical ward of a non-LVAD implanting centre is increasing. The purpose of this trilogy is to supply the immediate tools needed by the non-LVAD specialized physician: ambulance clinicians, emergency ward physicians, general cardiologists, internists, anaesthesiologists, and surgeons, to comply with the medical needs of this fast-growing population of LVAD-supported patients. The different issues discussed will follow the patient's pathway from the ambulance to the emergency department and from the emergency department to the internal or surgical wards and eventually to the discharge home from the hospital back to the general practitioner. In this first part of the trilogy on the management of LVAD-supported patients for the non-LVAD specialist healthcare provider, after the introduction on the assist devices technology in general, definitions and structured approach to the assessment of the LVAD-supported patient in the ambulance and emergency department is presented including cardiopulmonary resuscitation for LVAD-supported patients.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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