MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281760340 · doi:10.1002/vrc2.408

Surgical correction of left auricular aneurysm herniation through a pericardial defect in a dog with atrial fibrillation and mitral valve disease

2022· article· en· W4281760340 on OpenAlexaff
Mila Freire, Bérénice Conversy, Julie De Lasalle, Pascal Fontaine, Frédérik Rousseau‐Blass, Daniel Pang

Bibliographic record

VenueVeterinary Record Case Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryCentre de Recherche en Sciences Animales de DeschambaultUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationSinus rhythmCardiologyInternal medicinePericardiectomyCardioversionSurgeryMitral regurgitationMitral valvePericardium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pericardial defect is a rare condition, with risk of cardiac chamber strangulation or incarceration. Surgical correction is recommended when clinical signs are unmanageable and to decrease the risk of thromboemboli. A 15‐year‐old, 4.1‐kg, spayed female Shih Tzu dog presented to the hospital with a 6‐month history of weakness and syncope episodes. The dog had been diagnosed with degenerative mitral valve disease 9 years earlier. Thoracic radiographs, echocardiography and computed tomography indicated a left auricular herniation through a pericardial defect. Clinical signs were temporarily controlled with pimobendan, benazepril and clopidogrel, until the syncope episodes returned along with atrial fibrillation (unresponsive to oral digoxin). Surgical correction (auriculectomy and partial pericardiectomy) was performed via thoracotomy. Atrial fibrillation reverted to normal sinus rhythm following surgery and recovery was uneventful. The patient survived, arrhythmia‐free, for 25 months postoperatively. Syncope episodes never resolved.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVeterinary Record Case ReportsSame topicCardiovascular Conditions and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207