MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297991401 · doi:10.1097/dcc.0000000000000553

Evidence-Based Recommendations

2022· article· en· W4297991401 on OpenAlex
Mohamed Toufic El Hussein, Marianne Mikhail

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueDimensions of Critical Care Nursing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMount Royal UniversityCARE Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeft ventricular thrombusMedicineCardiologyFibrinolysisMyocardial infarctionThrombusInternal medicineStroke (engine)Magnetic resonance imagingIncidence (geometry)Intensive care medicineRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the potential complications of acute myocardial infarction is left ventricular thrombus (LVT). The incidence of LVT following acute myocardial infarction has decreased dramatically with early invasive reperfusion techniques or fibrinolysis. However, the risk of LVT formation remains significant and is associated with an increased risk of systemic embolism, stroke, cardiovascular events, and even death. Current guidelines indicate that dual antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation therapy for at least 3 months can reduce the risk of these events. While vitamin K antagonist is the preferred oral anticoagulant, there is growing evidence to support the use of direct-acting oral anticoagulants in LVT management. Cardiac magnetic resonance has shown the highest diagnostic accuracy for LVT assessment, followed by echocardiography with contrast agents. This article serves as a general review of the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of LVT.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.191
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.248 · 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