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 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 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 score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
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 teacher head, 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