MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201989696 · doi:10.1097/hco.0000000000000934

Challenges in diagnosis and management of coarctation of the aorta

2021· article· en· W3201989696 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Cardiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoarctation of the aortaStiffeningAortaAortic archThoracic aorta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Coarctation of the aorta remains a controversial topic with uncertainties in long-term outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent advances in fetal imaging including echocardiography and MRI offer novel opportunities for better detection and prediction of the need for neonatal intervention.New imaging techniques are providing novel insights about the impact of arch geometry and size on flow dynamics and pressure gradients. The importance of arch size rather than shape for optimal hemodynamics has been identified. Long-term outcome data suggest a significant increase in mortality risk in coarctation patients beyond the third decade when compared with the general population. Hypertension is highly prevalent not only in adult patients following repair of coarctation but also in normotensive patients presenting with LV diastolic dysfunction and adverse remodelling, indicating that abnormal vascular properties are important. Patients with coarctation undergoing neonatal repair are at risk for adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes and patients could benefit from timely neurocognitive evaluation and intervention. SUMMARY: Optimizing aortic arch size, prevention and aggressive treatment of hypertension and vascular stiffening are important to improve long-term outcomes.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in CardiologySame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207