Determinants of in-hospital death in patients with a thrombus straddling a patent foramen ovale: protocol of a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Thrombi identified on echocardiography at the time of straddling a patent foramen ovale (PFO) constitute a medical emergency with an associated imminent risk of death. Ischemic stroke (IS) and myocardial infarction (MI) occurring in patients with a thrombus straddling a PFO (TSPFO) may be associated with increased risk of in-hospital death. Variables associated with increased risk of death in women and men may be different. We will perform a systematic review of case reports and cases series of patients with a TSPFO to assess if IS and MI are associated with increased risk of in-hospital death and we will further stratify analyses by sex. Methods: This systematic review will include all case reports and case series of adult patients (18-year-old or older) with echocardiographic or pathological (e.g. at autopsy for older reports) evidence of a TSPFO published between inception and June 30, 2020, in any language. We will search in PubMed and Embase databases. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, retrieve full texts, and extract the data in a predesigned form. We will apply a multivariable logistic regression analysis to estimate the association of IS and MI with in-hospital mortality. We will stratify analyses by sex. Discussion: IS and MI in patients with TSPFO could potentially be associated with worse outcomes if they are not timely identified or left untreated. Both acute IS and MI require specific treatment (e.g. thrombolysis, primary coronary intervention, or mechanical thrombectomy) that may be influenced by the therapy instituted for the TSPFO. Knowing the incidence of acute IS and MI among patients diagnosed with TSPFO and whether they are associated with an increased risk of death would help to improve the management of this medical emergency. Protocol registration : CRD42020216118, PROSPERO.
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 | 0.035 | 0.058 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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".