MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205203511

Tetralogy of Fallot

2021· article· en· W3205203511 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Josue Diaz-Frias, Melissa Guillaume

Bibliographic record

VenueStatPearls · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCongenital Heart Disease Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTetralogy of FallotDuctus arteriosusMedicineCoarctation of the aortaTetralogyAutopsyCardiologyTruncus arteriosusInternal medicineAortaAnatomyHeart disease
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tetralogy of Fallot (TOF), historically and appropriately referred as Steno-Fallot tetralogy, was first described by the Danish physician/anatomist Dane Niels Stensen, also referenced as Nicoulas Steno in Latin, a pioneer in anatomy and geology. His work made significant contributions to the field of cardiac anatomy and pathology. The discovery of the constellation of findings that hallmark the tetralogy was first described in a short paper titled “Dissection of a Monstrous Foetus in Paris” in 1671, highlighting the unusual form in which the arteries emerge, the narrowing of the pulmonary artery, the absence of the ductus arteriosus, a subaortic interventricular septal defect, an overriding aortic canal common to both ventricles, and the physiology of fetal cardiac circulation describing how blood was redirected directly into the aorta instead of the pulmonary artery. In 1777, Eduard Sandifort, a Dutch physician, reported a case of tetralogy in a 16-month-old patient called “the blue boy.” At first, he was thought to have asthma; however, an autopsy revealed a congenitally malformed heart with no signs of ductus arteriosus or ligamentum arteriosum. Later in 1782, William Hunter, a Scottish physician, presented to the Society of Physicians in London a case of a 13-year-old boy with tetralogy and blue spells, who was discovered posthumously in 1774, along with three other cases of congenital heart disease.Many other cases have been presented by Pulteney (1785), Abernethy (1793), Bell (1797), Dorsey (1812), and Farre (1814). The first case was reported in America at the University of Pennsylvania by Thaxter in 1816, with subsequent cases reported by Peacock (1858 and 1869), Widman (1881), and finally Fallot (1888). Etienne-Louis Arthur Fallot described in an elegant style and detail four cardinal features that differentiate it from other cyanotic cardiac conditions, emphasizing that this was not a product of chance and that cyanosis was not caused by a patent foramen ovale, as proposed by many others. He attributed it to an intrauterine pathologic process and understood that this tetralogy was essentially just one anomaly involving the pulmonary artery and the subpulmonary infundibulum, causing pulmonary stenosis, an interventricular communication, the biventricular origin of the aorta, and right ventricular hypertrophy, disqualifying the patency of the foramen ovale as a fifth anatomical association. The names used by Fallot were “La maladie bleue” (the blue disease) or “cyanose cardiaque” (cardiac cyanosis). In 1924, Maude Elizabeth Seymour Abbott, a pioneer in pediatric cardiology of Montreal, Canada, entitled it “tetralogy of Fallot.”

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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 venueStatPearlsSame topicCongenital Heart Disease StudiesFrench-language works237,207