MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231112839 · doi:10.1055/s-0037-1606251

Portopulmonary Hypertension

2017· review· en· W4231112839 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Watherald, Olivier Sitbon, Laurent Savale

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease and Transplantation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortopulmonary hypertensionMedicinePulmonary hypertensionPortal hypertensionCardiologyInternal medicineLiver transplantationHeart failureHemodynamicsTransplantationCirrhosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Portal hypertension may have major consequences on the pulmonary vasculature due to complex pathophysiological interactions between liver and lungs. Portopulmonary hypertension (PoPH) is characterized by the association of portal hypertension and pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). As progressive elevation of right ventricular afterload can lead to right heart failure, PoPH is a serious complication of portal hypertension, affecting functional status and prognosis of patients. Early detection by transthoracic echocardiography must be performed in symptomatic patients and in candidates for liver transplantation (LT). Right heart catheterization remains mandatory to confirm the diagnosis and exclude all other causes of elevated pulmonary pressures. The management of PoPH includes PAH-targeted therapies although few studies have evaluated these medications in this specific indication. The impact of LT on PoPH outcome remains complex and must be specified by future collaborative investigation. Although uncontrolled PoPH is associated with higher risk of postoperative right heart failure and death, stabilization, improvement, or normalization of pulmonary hemodynamics after LT seem to be achievable goals in selected patients with PoPH.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations41
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Respiratory and Critical Care MedicineSame topicLiver Disease and TransplantationFrench-language works237,207