Disharmonious Ventricular Relationship and Topology for the Given Atrioventricular Connections. Contemporary Diagnostic Approach Using 3D Modeling and Printing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the last issue, two case reports separately present examples of the extremely rare and complex congenital heart diseases that show concordant atrioventricular connections to the L-looped ventricles in the presence of situs solitus. Both cases highlight that the relationship between the two ventricles within the ventricular mass is not always harmonious with the given atrioventricular connection. Such disharmony between the connections and relationships requires careful assessment of the three basic facets of cardiac building blocks, namely their morphology, the relationship of their component parts, and their connections with the adjacent segments. 3D imaging and printing can now facilitate an otherwise difficult diagnosis in such complex situations. Rotation of either the 3D images or the models permit accurate assessment of the ventricular topologic pattern by creating the right ventricular en-face septal view, thus facilitating placement of the observer’s hands. As we now emphasize, an alternative approach, which might prove more attractive to imagers, is to rotate the ventricular mass to provide the ventricular apical view, thus permitting determination of the ventricular relationship without using the hands.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".