MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202513085 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab726

A case of crowded heart: closing the door after the visitors

2021· article· en· W3202513085 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre Natalis, Jean‐Bernard Masson, Jessica Forcillo, Jeannot Potvin

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular and Diving-Related Complications
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineAortic valveShunt (medical)OcclusionHeart failureLeft atrial appendage occlusionSurgeryAtrial fibrillationWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 79-year-old woman was admitted to the cardiology department for right heart failure (RHF). This patient had undergone a recent intervention consisting of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with an EvolutR 23 mm (arrow, Panel A), transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) with a S3 Ultra 23 mm (arrowhead, Panel A) and left atrial appendage occlusion with an Amplatzer Amulet 18 mm (*, Panel A) for degenerated aortic and mitral bioprotheses and recurrent anaemia due to angiodysplasia. An expected iatrogenic atrial septal defect (ASD) with left-right shunt was noted on post-procedural echocardiography. Thereafter, the patient developed clinical and echographic signs of right heart failure leading to an invasive evaluation in the cathlab. An occluding balloon (Panel B) was positioned across the ASD and confirmed non-significant elevation of the transmitral gradient (From 7.9 to 8.7 mmHG, Panel C) along with reduction of the V wave in the right atrium (from 22 to 17 mmHG, Panel D). A 20-mm Amplatzer ASD occluder (°, Panel A) was successfully deployed. The patient evolved well and control transoesophageal echocardiography showed an absence of residual shunt and functional TAVI, TMVI and Amulet prostheses.

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)0.001
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: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiovascular and Diving-Related ComplicationsFrench-language works237,207