Computed Tomography Aortic Valve Calcium Scoring in Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sex-specific thresholds of computed tomography (CT)-derived aortic valve calcification (AVC) or AVC density (AVCd) to identify severe aortic stenosis (AS) have been established in populations that consisted mainly of Caucasians with a tricuspid aortic valve. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy (i.e., sensitivity and specificity) of previously established thresholds to identify severe AS in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and according to ethnicity: Caucasian vs. Asian. Methods: We built a multicenter registry of echocardiographic and CT data collected in BAV patients with at least mild AS and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction from 7 different centers. Anatomic severity of AS obtained by CT-derived AVC and AVCd was compared to hemodynamic severity of AS obtained by echocardiography. Results: (Se/Spe = 86/80%) for AVCd. Conclusions: The optimal thresholds to identify hemodynamically severe AS in BAV patients are similar in Caucasians but appear to be higher in Asian men, compared with thresholds previously reported in tricuspid aortic valve patients. Nonetheless, the thresholds currently proposed in the guidelines have good accuracy and can be applied in BAV patients to confirm AS severity.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it