MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210361453 · doi:10.1016/j.jscai.2021.100008

SCAI SHOCK Stage Classification Expert Consensus Update: A Review and Incorporation of Validation Studies

2022· review· en· W4210361453 on OpenAlexaff
Srihari S. Naidu, David A. Baran, Jacob C. Jentzer, Steven M. Hollenberg, Sean van Diepen, Mir B. Basir, Cindy L. Grines, Deborah B. Diercks, Shelley Hall, Navin K. Kapur, William Kent, Sunil V. Rao, Marc D. Samsky, Hölger Thiele, Alexander G. Truesdell, Timothy D. Henry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCardiogenic shockShock (circulatory)MedicineStage (stratigraphy)Psychological interventionHealth careIntensive care medicineMedical physicsNursingRadiologyCardiologyPolitical scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Warm Welcome to The First Issue of JSCAIJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsVol. 1Issue 1100013PreviewIt is my great privilege to have been entrusted with the launch of the Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (JSCAI). JSCAI is a powerful vehicle for authors to contribute and disseminate new clinical and scientific evidence related to all aspects of interventional cardiovascular medicine. As we release our first issue of the JSCAI, I hope you will enjoy the content and be motivated to contribute to our interventional community by submitting your next scientific manuscript. Full-Text PDF Open AccessThe Changing Landscape of Cardiogenic Shock: One Step Closer to Speaking a Common TongueJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsVol. 1Issue 1100012Preview"Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything." George Bernard Shaw (1944) Full-Text PDF Open Access

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.169
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

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

Citations63
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207