A quarter of a century biomechanical rupture risk assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Achievements, clinical relevance, and ongoing developments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) disease, the local enlargement of the infrarenal aorta, is a serious condition that causes many deaths, especially in men exceeding 65 years of age. Over the past quarter of a century, computational biomechanical models have been developed towards the assessment of AAA risk of rupture, technology that is now on the verge of being integrated within the clinical decision-making process. The modeling of AAA requires a holistic understanding of the clinical problem, in order to set appropriate modeling assumptions and to draw sound conclusions from the simulation results. In this article we summarize and critically discuss the proposed modeling approaches and report the outcome of clinical validation studies for a number of biomechanics-based rupture risk indices. Whilst most of the aspects concerning computational mechanics have already been settled, it is the exploration of the failure properties of the AAA wall and the acquisition of robust input data for simulations that has the greatest potential for the further improvement of this technology.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".