SCAI Technical Review on Management of Patent Foramen Ovale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patent foramen ovale (PFO) is a common anatomic variant associated with intermittent right-to-left shunting. Transcatheter PFO closure has been proposed to address multiple clinical conditions including stroke, transient ischemic attack, migraine, and decompression illness. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using the GRADE approach to address 5 questions formulated by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Guideline Panel in patient, intervention, comparator, outcome (PICO) format. Medical literature from January 2015 through May 2021 was searched. Extracted data underwent review and risk-of-bias assessment by 2 independent researchers. Pooled effect estimates were calculated. Certainty of evidence was determined for each query. Results: Our search identified 2701 titles and abstracts, of which 30 met eligibility criteria and informed the technical review. Data were abstracted to address outcomes of PFO closure for patients with and without prior stroke, in comparison to antiplatelet therapy, in comparison to anticoagulation, and with various post-procedure antithrombotic regimens. Conclusion: In appropriately selected patients with prior stroke, transcatheter PFO closure reduces the risk of recurrent stroke more than antiplatelet therapy alone. Evidence to support PFO closure is weaker regarding older patients, anticoagulation, thrombophilia, transient ischemic attack, migraine, and decompression illness. Data from this technical review will inform the SCAI Guideline for Transcatheter Patent Foramen Ovale Closure.
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 | 0.010 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".